Full text of "The Conservation Atlas of Tropical Forests: the Americas"

THE CONSERVATION ATL/J
^ OF

TROPICAL FORESTS

1 tit CONSERVATION ATLAS OF TROPICAL FORESTS

THE AMERICAS

This \olume. covering the Caribbean. Central America
(including Mexico) and South America, is the third
and final one in the series The Conservation Atlas of
Tropical Forests with Asia and the Pacific having been
published in 1991 and Africa in 1992.

The threats to the forests of tropical America have been
the centre of international concern for some years now,
with the 1 992 United Nations Conference on the
Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro. Brazil
highlighting the complexities of the factors that lead to
deforestation throughout the tropics. Although the
forests in the Americas are by far the most extensive
remaining in the humid tropics, with large areas of forest
in the Amazon and Orinoco basins being more or less
untouched, other areas have suffered devastating
deforestation in recent decades. In particular, the Pacific
coasts of Colombia and Ecuador and many places in
Central America and the Caribbean have lost much of
their natural habitat this century, w hile the Atlantic forest
of Brazil was depleted even earlier.

As in the other volumes, this Atlas is divided into two
parts, the first dealing with subjects that are relevant to
the region in general and the second examining each
country in detail. It is evident from chapters within part
one that knowledge exists of many of the sites and
management regimes needed to conserve biodiversity
in the Americas and overall many of the authors are
optimistic about the prospects for the conservation and
rational use of the forests in the region. Nevertheless,
the detailed analysis of each country makes it evident
that in many cases, in spite of the sophisticated
technology available, there is still considerable
controversy about the areas of forest present and the
rate at which deforestation is occurring. Much more
research is evidently needed and data of the sort
provided here are una\ oidably out of date almost as
they are produced, but waiting for the definitive answers
will mean that any solutions come too late.

It is hoped that the facts and analysis within this Atlas
will ultimately assist with the conservation and
sustainable management of the remaining forests
within the Americas and that this vital resource can
be preserved for future generations.

Printed in Singapore

>4-=fD

Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2010 with funding from

UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge

http://www.archive.org/details/conservationatla96harc

THE CONSERVATION ATLAS

OF
TROPICAL FORESTS

THE AMERICAS

Contributors

Celeste Acevedo. Fundackin Moises Berloni.

Asuncion. Paraguay
Denis Adams. Natural History Museum. London.

UK
Mark Aldrjch. Cambridge. UK
Javier Arce. Fundacion Peruana de

Conservacion de la Naturaleza. Lima. Peru
Roberto Araqhistain. Director Forestal SFN-

IRENA. Managua. Nicaragua
Steve Bass. IIED, London. UK
Neil Bird. Belize Forest Planning and

Management Project. Belmopan. Belize
Richard O. Bierregaard. Jr.. Smithsonian

Institution. Washington. USA
Tim Boyle. CIFOR. Bogor. Indonesia
Robert Brown. Georgetown. Guyana
Gerardo Budowski. San Jose. Costa Rica
Lisa Burley. lUCN-South America, Quito.

Ecuador
John Burton. Programme for Belize.

Saxmundham. Suffolk. LIK
Jorge Castiglione, ORCA. San Jo.se. Costa Rica
Glullermo Castilleja. WWF-US. Washington.

USA
Luis H. Elizonda Castillo. INBio. San Jose.

Costa Rica
Bruce Cabarle. WRI, Washington. USA
Dan Chalmers. Taverham. Norfolk. UK
Graham Chaplin. CONSEFORH. Siguatepeque.

Honduras
Rob Clay. BirdLife International. Cambridge.

UK
David Cleary. Centre of Latin American

Studies. Cambridge University. Cambridge.

UK
Marcus Colchester. World Rainforest

Movement. Oxford. UK
Nigel Collar. BirdLife International.

Cambridge. UK
Jim Crisp. President. Monteverde Conservation

League. Costa Rica
Mike Crosby. BirdLife International,

Cambridge. UK
Stephen Davis. Kew. Surrey. UK
Alonso Matamoros Delgado, San Jose, Costa

Rica
Mark Dillenbeck, IUCN-US, Washington,

USA
Charles Doumenge, IUCN. Gland, Switzerland
Marc Dourojeanni. Inter American

Development Bank. Washington, USA
Giles D'Souza. TREES. EC-Joint Research

Center. Ispra. Italy
RODRIGO DUNO. BIOMA representative.

Reading. UK
Maria Jose Duran. Fundacion Pro-Sierra

Nevada de Sante Marta. Colombia
Michael Eden. Royal Holloway and Bedford

College. London. UK
Susan Eggen-McIntosh. USDA/Southern

Forest Experiment Station. New Orleans. USA
David Evans. USDA/Soulhern Forest

Experiment Station. New Orleans. USA
Philip Fearnside, INPA. Manaus. Brazil
Julio Figueroa Colon. International Institute of

Tropical Forestry. Rio Piedras, Puerto Rico
Jennifer Fox. CDC-Paraguay, Asuncion.

Paraguay
WiLFREDO Franco. Centro Amazonico de

Investigaciones Ambientales Alexander von

Humboldt. SADA-AMAZONAS. Caracas.

Venezuela
Raul Gauto. Fundacion Moises Bertoni,

Asuncion, Paraguay
The late Alwyn Gentry, Missouri Botanical

Garden, St Louis, Missouri, USA
Fernando Ghersi, IUCN. Gland. Switzerland
Mariano Gimenez-Dixon. IUCN. Gland.

Switzerland
Juan Carlos Godoy. IUCN, Guatemala City,

Guatemala

Jean-Jacques de Granville, ORSTOM,

Cayenne. French Guiana
N.R. de Graff. Wageningen Agricultural

University. Wageningen. The Netherlands
David Gray. Belize Forest Planning and

Management Project. Belmopan. Belize
Charles Hall, Syracuse University, Syracuse,

USA
Pat Halpin, L'niversitv of Virginia,

Charlottesville, USA
Sylvia Harcourt Carra.sco, Charles Darwm

Foundation. Quito. Ecuador
Jerry Harrison. WCMC. Cambridge. UK
Gary Hartshorn. WWF-US, Washington,

USA
Alan Hamilton, WWF-UK. Godalming, UK
John Hemming, Royal Geographical Society,

London, UK
Jorge Hernandez, INDERENA, Bogota,

Colombia
Olga Herrera-MacBryde, Smithsonian

Institution, Washington. USA
Henry Hooghiemstra. Hugo de Vries

Laboratory. University of Amsterdam.

Amsterdam. The Netherlands
Dieter Hoener. Servicio Aleman. Santo

Domingo. Dominican Republic
Steven Hugh-Jones. Cambridge University.

Cambridge. UK
Otto Huber. Fundacion Instituto Botanico de

Venezuela. Caracas. Venezuela
Susan Iremonger. The Nature Conservancy.

Arlington. USA
Martin Jenkins. Cambridge. UK
M. Johnston. GAHEF. Georgetown. Guyana
W.B.J. JONKERS. Wageningen Agricultural

University. Wageningen. The Netherlands
Charles Kenny-Jordon. Desarollo Forestal

Participativo en los Andes. FAO. Quito
Br'^ AN Kerr. Commonwealth Secretariat.

London. UK
Bruce King. Land Information Centre.

Belmopan. Belize
Erik M. Lammerts van Bueren. The Tropenbos

Foundation. Wageningen. The Netherlands
Adrian Long. BirdLife International.

Cambridge. UK
James Lowen. BirdLife International,

Cambridge. UK
Maria Marconi. CDC-Bolivia. La Paz. Bolivia
Jeff McNeely. IUCN. Gland. Switzerland
Craig McFarland. President. Charles Darwin

Foundation. Moscow. USA
Jaime Melo P.. Universidad Nacional Agraria -

La Molina, Lima, Peru
Doug Muchoney, The Nature Conservancy,

Arlington, USA
Julio Ruiz Murrieta, IUCN, Gland. Switzerland
Charles C. Mueller. University of Illinois.

Urbana. Illinois. USA
Lisa Naughton, Program for Studies in Tropical

Conservation. Florida University. Gainesville,

USA
Jeremy Narby. Moudon. Switzerland
Namiko Nagashiro. CDC-Bolivia. La Paz.

Bolivia
Jose Pedro de Oliveira Costa, IUCN, Sao

Paulo, Brasil
Jose Ottenwalder, Florida Museum of Natural

History, Gainesville, USA
Graciela Palacios S., ANCON, Panama City.

Panama
Heliodoro Sanchez Paez. INDERENA, Bogota,

Colombia
John Palmer, Oxford. UK
Silvia Pardi. BIOMA. Caracas. Venezuela
Paul Paryski. UNDP. Port-au-Prince. Haiti
A.M. POLAK. University of Utrecht. Utrecht. The

Netherlands
Erne.sto Ponce. CONSEFORH. Siguatepeque,

Honduras

Ghillean Prance. Royal Botanic Gardens. Kew.

Surrey. UK
Maarit Puhakka. Department of Biology.

University of Turku. Turku. Finland
RosARio Ortiz Quhano. Fundacion Pro-Sierra

Nevada de Sante Marta. Colombia
C.R. QuiROA. IUCN, Guatemala City. Guatemala
Ernesto Raez Luna. Program for Studies in

Tropical Conservation. Florida University,

Gaines\ille. LfSA
Kent H Redford. Program for Studies in

Tropical Conservation. Florida University,

Gainesville. USA
Henk Remme. Desarollo Forestal Partieipativa en

los Andes. FAO. Quito. Ecuador
Jose Flores Rodas. ORCA, San Jose. Costa

Rica
Jose Carlos Rodriguez Grau. BIOMA.

Caracas. Venezuela
Aldemaro Romero. BIOMA. Caracas,

Venezuela
Kalle Ruokolainen, Department of Biology,

University of Turku, Turku, Finland
Marcos Sanjlirjo, Fundacion Moises Bertoni,

Asuncion, Paraguay
Daniel Sabatier, Sauve, France
Andreas Schubert, Servicio Aleman, Santo

Domingo, Dominican Republic
F.N SCATENA. International Institute of Tropical

Forestry. Rio Piedras. Puerto Rico
Charles Secrett. FoE. London. UK
Chris Sharpe. Protected Areas Data Unit.

WCMC. Cambridge. UK
Nigel Sizer. World Resources Institute.

Washington. USA
Claudia Sobrevila. The Nature Conservancy.

Arlington. USA
Claire Sorenson. USAID. Washington. USA
James Solomon. Missouri Botanical Garden.

St Louis. Missouri. USA
Alison Stattersfield. BirdLife International.

Cambridge. UK
Bob Styles, Department of Plant Sciences,

University of Oxford. Oxford. UK
Luis SuAREZ. EcoCiencia/WCI-NYZS. Quito.

Ecuador
GiiSTAVO SuAREZ DE Freitas C. Fundacion

Peruana de Conservacion de la Naturaleza.

Lima. Peru
Byron Swift. IUCN-US. Washington. USA
Paola Sylva. Directora Area de Invesligacion.

Centro de Educacion y Promocion Popular.

Ecuador
Ed Tanner. The Botany School. University of

Cambridge. Cambridge. UK
Jim Thorsell. IUCN. Gland. Switzerland
Hern.'\n Torres. Corporacion, Nacional Forestal,

Chile
Carlos Castano Uribe, INDERENA, Bogota.

Colombia
Thomas Van der Hammen, Hugo de Vries

Laboratory, University of Amsterdam,

Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Virginia Vasquez. Belize Audubon Society,

Belize City, Belize
W. Veening, European Working Group in

Amazonia. Amsterdam. The Netherlands
Jane Villa-Lobos. Smithsonian Institution.

Washington. USA
Frank Wadsworth. Southern Forest Experiment

Station. Rio Piedras. Puerto Rico
P.L. Weaver. International Institute of Tropical

Forestry. Rio Piedras. Puerto Rico
Marga Wfrkhoven. National Herbarium of

Suriname. Paramaribo. Suriname
David Wege. BirdLife International. Cambridge.

UK
Padraig Whelan. Investigator. Chales Darwin

Research Station. Galapagos. Ecuador
Charles Woods. Florida Museum of Natural

History. Gainesville. USA

THE CONSERVATION ATLAS

TROPICAL FORESTS

THE AMERICAS

Editors
Caroline S. Harcourt

World Conservation Monitoring Centre, Cambridge. UK

Jeffrey A. Sayer

lUCN — The World Conservation Union. Gland. Switzerland
Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor. Indonesia

Map Editor and Editorial Assistant: Clare Billington

World Conservation Monitoring Centre, Cambridge. UK

lUCN

f ffl (BP

J CTFOR *oRiD CONSERVATION v^ y^

Simon & Schuster

New York • London • Toronto • Sydney • Tokyo • Singapore

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This Atlas was produced under the Forest Conservation
Programme of lUCN, The World Conservation Union.
lUCN's work in tropical forests receives financial support
from the government of Sweden. Most of the research and
editing and the map preparation was done at the World
Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC), which is sup-
ported by lUCN, The World Wide Fund for Nature
(WWF) and the United Nations Environment Programme
(UNEP); the Centre is also part of UNEP's Global
Environment Monitoring System, towards which this Atlas
is a contribution.

lUCN is especially indebted to The British Petroleum
Company p. I.e. for the original idea for the Atlas and for the
generous funding which enabled the research for the project
to be undertaken.

Thanks also go to Sun Microsystems Inc. and IBM. for
computer donations which were used for running the
Geographic Information System (GIS) at WCMC needed to
compile the maps, and to the Environmental Systems

Research Institute (ESRl) of California, who donated the
ARC/INFO software for the project. Petroconsultants Ltd of
Cambridge kindly made available "MundoCart". a world dig-
ital mapping database which proved invaluable in the prepa-
ration of this Atlas.

Thanks are due to the many authors and contributors to
this Atlas, both those listed in this publication and the many
unnamed people whose work is essential for the production
of a book such as this.

The editors would also like to thank all their colleagues at
WCMC. lUCN and CIFOR without whose work this project
would not have been possible. Particular thanks are due to
the following staff at WCMC; Corinna Ra\ilious. Simon
BIyth. Gillian Bunting. Mary Edwards and Jonathan Rhind
for help with the maps and Barbara Brown, Brian
Groombridge. Martin Jenkins, Richard Luxmoore, Jim Paine
and Chris Sharpe for much appreciated, varied assistance. At
lUCN, invaluable help was provided by Jill Blockhus and
Ursula Senn.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including
photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the Publisher.

Macmillan Library Reference USA

Simon & Schuster Macmillan

866 Third Avenue

New York. NY 10022

Printed in Singapore

Printmg number
123456789 10

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Puhlication Data

The conservation atlas of tropical forests: the Americas/the World Conservation Union;

editors Caroline S. Harcourt. Jeffrey A. Sayer: map editor Clare Billington.

p. cm.

•■Copyright lUCN" - Verso t.p.

Includes bibliographical references, glossary and index.

Contents: The issues - Country studies.

ISBN 0-13-340886-8 (lib. bdg.)

1. Rain forests - America - Maps. 2. Man - Influence on nature - America - Maps.

3. Conservation of natural resources - America - Maps.

I. Harcourt. Caroline. II. International Union for Conservation of

Nature and Natural Resources.

Glini.K3C6 1995 333.75- 16'0728022 -dc20

This paper meets the requirements of ANSl/NISO Z39.48- 1 992 ( Permanence of Paper).

ISBN D-13-3MDflflb-a

Acknowledgement of Sources

The sources of the country maps are gi\en at the end of each chapter.

The sources of the illustrations and sketch maps are gi\'en in footnotes and captions.

The designations of geographical entities in this book, and the presentation of the

material, do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of WCMC

or other participating organisations concerning the legal status of any country, territory.

or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.

The views of the authors expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of

WCMC or other participating organisations. Printed and bound in Singapore.

Contents

Foreword ^i

Part I: The Issues

1 Introduction 9

2 The History of the Forests and CHmate of Tropical South America 1 7

3 Identifying Areas for Plant Conservation in The Americas 27

4 Establishing Conservation Priorities Using Endemic Birds 35

5 Forest Wildlife and its Exploitation by Humans 47

6 Forest Peoples 57

7 Agricultural Colonization Policies and Deforestation in Amazonia 64

8 Protected Areas 73

9 A Future for Neotropical Forests 85

Part II: Country Studies

THE CARIBBEAN

10 Cuba 95

11 Hispaniola 1^2
Dominican Republic

Haiti

12 Jamaica 112

13 Lesser Antilles 120
Antigua and Barbuda Mailinique

Dominica St Kitts and Nevis

Grenada St Lucia

Guadeloupe St Vincent and the Grenadines

14 Puerto Rico 138

15 Trinidad and Tobago 144

CENTRAL AMERICA

16 Belize 151

17 Costa Rica 160

18 El Salvador 171

19 Guatemala 176

20 Honduras 185

21 Mexico 193

22 Nicaragua 206

23 Panama 212

SOUTH AMERICA

24 Bolivia 219

25 Brazil 229

26 Colombia 249

27 Ecuador 260

28 French Guiana 270

29 Guyana 278

30 Paraguay 286

31 Peru^ 294

32 Surinam 303

33 Venezuela 312

Acronyms
Glossary-
Index of Species
General Index

Foreword

The threats to the rainforests of tropical America have been at the centre of international environmental concerns
now for a couple of decades. Yet the material in this up-to-date and authoritative atlas highlights the continuing
extent of scientific uncertainty over the critical issues that will determine the future use and conservation of the
forests. We learn that the forests were radically different under the drier climates that prevailed as recently as
10.000 years ago. and that human populations have had a major impact on the forests since much earlier. We learn
too that the population of Amazonia may have been higher when the first Spanish explorers arrived, than in the
middle of the 20th Century. The present biological diversity of the forests has evolved in an environment con-
stantly subject to modification due to human activities and changes in climate. And today, the ability of the forests
and their biodiversity to resist the activities of extractivists (or even selective loggers) remains unclear.

This atlas will not finally lay to rest the controversy over the rate at which tropical American forests are being
attacked. Uncertainty will persist. In spite of the sophistication of modem remote sensing technology there are still
major discrepancies between estimates of forest area and rates of loss derived from different sources. Much of this
uncertainty stems from a tendency to over-simplify the processes going on in the forests. In most situations we are
not dealing with an abrupt change from forest to non-forest. We are dealing with a gradual insidious degradation
resulting from abusive harvesting of some of the forest components, or — more frequently — from the progres-
sive expansion of low-intensity agriculture. It is relatively easy to measure the areas from which the forest has dis-
appeared completely; it is much more difficult to measure the impact of gradual deterioration on species-poor or
scrubland situations. It is reassuring to see that much of the forest in the heart of Amazonia is still intact; it is
alarming to see the extent to which the forests on the periphery of the region have been devastated. The implica-
tions for the conservation of biodiversity and ecological functions are far more complex than might be implied by
the popular vision of an across-the-board loss of so many football fields a day.

If understanding of the biophysical processes in the forests is limited, that of the social and economic issues is
even more problematic. Much more work clearly needs to be done if governments are to understand properly the
impacts of their macro-economic policies on their forests. Is economic growth good for the forests or bad? As tim-
ber resources in Asia and Africa decline, will the industry turn to South America? Is this a potential threat to the
forests or is it an opportunity to conserve them as an economically valuable resource? Will the development of
major food exporting industries in the region generate the wealth which will pay to conserve the forests or will it
lead to further fragmentation and degradation?

Not all is uncertain or unsettling. Certain facts which emerge from this book give grounds for optimism. The
population of South America will stabilise sooner — and at a lower density — than the populations of Africa and
tropical Asia. There will be far more land per capita when this equilibrium is reached than there will be in the
other regions. The level of concern for forest conservation issues in the region is high and growing fast. This is
manifest, for example, in the rapidly growing number of members of lUCN — The World Conservation Union in
the region and in the intensity and quality of their contributions to the Union's work. There is room in the
Americas for both economic development and large scale conservation of natural habitats. The value of these nat-
ural areas, particularly the forests, is increasingly recognised by the international community. If appropriate finan-
cial mechanisms can be refined, we may not be too far from the days when the world can begin to make equitable
payment for the benefits that we all derive from tropical forests.

The United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development has assumed some responsibility for — and
resumed its deliberations on — the future of our forests. I trust that this will yield some progress in making the
world's attempts to conserve forests more cohesive and effective and that the facts and analysis in this atlas will
contribute to the process.

David McDowell

Director General

lUCN — The World Conservation Union

PARTI

1 Introduction

The countries covered in this Alias — those in the Caribbean.
Central America (including Mexico) and South America —
hold over half of the world's tropical forests: they have consid-
erably more forest than either Africa or Asia and the Pacific.
Nevertheless, this rather favourable general picture requires
qualification. Although very large areas of the forest in the
Amazon and Orinoco basins have been little changed during the
present century, there are regions on the southern and eastern
borders of Amazonia, on the Pacific coasts of Ecuador and
Colombia and many locations in Central America and the
Caribbean that have suffered devastating deforestation in recent
decades, whilst the Atlantic coastal forest in Brazil was already
depleted well before the beginning of this century.

The area of forest cleared each year in The Americas is also
considerably higher than in Africa or Asia and the Pacific,
although the annual percentage cleared in the Americas is
exceeded by that in Asia. The causes of deforestation are many
and varied, although, in contrast to the situation in Africa and
Asia, the overriding direct cause in recent years has been the
extension of the agricultural frontier for large-scale farming and
ranching operations. These and other problems are discussed in
more detail in Chapters 2-9, while separate analyses for each
country are provided in Chapters 10-33.

Forest Cover in Latin America and the Caribbean as
Estimated by FAO

FAO has recently updated estimates of forest cover in all coun-
tries in the tropical region and published them in a report enti-
tled Forest resources assessment 1990: Tropical countries
(FAO, 1993). However, unlike in the publication used in the
earlier two volumes of this series of Atlases (An Interim Report
on the State of Forest Resources in the Developing Countries -
FAO. 1988) which gave estimates for forest cover in 1980, the
forests are not divided into open and closed broadleaved forests,
nor are figures given for conifer or bamboo forests. The esti-
mates given by FAO (1993) are for all forests with a canopy
cover of more than 10 per cent within six different ecofloristic
zones (Table 1.1). FAO (1993). however, give no detailed
descriptions of the different forest formations or of the zones in
which they occur. In this Atlas, as for the other two. the inten-
tion is to map closed formations only. For this reason, the FAO
estimate of forest area given at the head of each chapter
includes the areas of forests within only the tropical rain forest
zone, the moist deciduous forest zone and the hill and montane
zone of Table 1.1. The much drier and apparently more open
formations in the other categories given by FAO have been
excluded.

The countries that FAO includes in each region and the areas

of forest that occur within them are listed in Table 1.1. These
countries are the same as those covered in this Atlas, except that
the Bahamas has not been included here as it is outside the trop-
ics. The regional grouping of the countries is, however, differ-
ent. The Guianas are included in South America in this Atlas,
whereas FAO includes them with the Caribbean countries.

Including all forests with a canopy cover of 10 per cent or
more, it is estimated by FAO (1993) that, as of 1990. forest
cover in Latin America and the Caribbean is 918 million ha
(9,181,160 sq. km in Table 1.1) or 52 percent of the total tropi-
cal forest area. Of this, the vast majority (8,029,040 sq. km or
87.5 per cent) is in South America, with 70 per cent of that in
Brazil, while only 471,150 sq. km or 5.1 per cent is in the
Caribbean and 680,970 sq. km or 7.4 per cent is in Central
America. Calculating the area of forest within the three
ecofloristic zones considered here gives a figure of 8,700,000
sq. km of forest in Latin America and the Caribbean (Table 7 in
FAO. 1993).

Although estimates for closed broadleaved forests are given
in FAO's Forest resources assessment 1990: Tropical
countries, those in Latin America and the Caribbean are referred
to in this publication only in Table 5c, entitled "state of logging
1990". Here it is indicated that this forest type covers 6.683,670
sq. km in Latin America and the Caribbean. However, some
countries (El Salvador, Antigua/Barbuda, Dominica. Grenada,
St. Kitts/Nevis, St Lucia, St Vincent and Puerto Rico) have been
omitted from the list and it is unclear whether this is because
they are considered to have no closed broadleaved forest or
because no logging takes place in them. The estimates of closed
broadleaved forest cover from Table 5c (FAO, 1993) are given
here in Table 1.2.

FAO (1993) gives estimates for annual deforestation in the
tropics between the years of 1981 and 1990. In Latin America
and the Caribbean as a whole, average annual deforestation dur-
ing the last decade (1981-1990) in all formations was 74.000
sq. km (0.8 per cent). Almost 50 per cent of this occurred in
Brazil. It should be noted, that the figure given for annual defor-
estation at the head of each country chapter excludes clearing in
the dry formations.

FAO's Estimates of Forest Cover in Africa and Asiq and the
Pacific-
It seems appropriate in this final volume in the series The
Conservation Atlas of Tropical Forests, to give a brief account
of the recent FAO (1993) statistics for forest area in the regions
covered in the earlier volumes (Collins et al., 1991, Sayer et al..
1992) as a comparison with those given here for Latin America
and the Caribbean.

Introduction

Table 1.1 Area of forest formations in Latin America and the Caribbean in 1990 as reported by FAD

FOREST FORMATION

Total foresl

Tropical rail}

Moist

Dry deciduous

Very dry

Desert zone

Hill and

(sq. km)

forest zone

dccichioiis

forest zone

foresl zone

(cold/hot)

montane

(sq. km)

forest zone

(sq. km)

Coiintiy

(sq. km)

Costa Rica

14,2S0

6.250

8,020

El Salvador

1.230

330

120

790

Guatemala

42,250

25.420

16.150

690

Honduras

46.050

12.860

4.370

28.820

Mexico

485.860

24.410

111.100

15.900

7,590

14.240

312.610

Nicaragua

60,130

37.120

3.480

19.530

Panama

31,170

18.020

670

12,490

CENTRAL AMERICA

680.970

124.400

135.880

15.900

7.590

14.240

382,940

Antigua/Barbuda

100

Bahamas

1.860

1.240

470

Belize

19.960

19.570

390

160

Cuba

17.150

1.140

12.470

3.520

Dominica

440

Dominican Rep.

10.770

3.410

2.7.30

4.630

French Guyana

79.970

79.930

Grenada

Guadeloupe

930

Guyana

184.160

133.370

31.670

19,120

Haiti

230

100

Jamaica

2.390

1.220

1.130

Maninique

430

Puerto Rico

3.210

490

1.510

1.210

St Kitts/Nevis

130

St Lucia

St Vincent

110

100

Surinam

147.680

1 14.400

33.280

Trinidad/Tobago

1.550

CARIBBEAN

471.150

357.070

84,830

490

28.670

Bolivia

493.170

355.820

73.460

63,850

Brazil

5.611.070

2.915.970

1.970.820

288.630

435.650

Colombia

540,640

474.550

41.010

180

24.900

Ecuador

119.620

71.500

16.690

440

31.000

Paraguay

128,590

60,370

67.940

270

Peru

679.060

403.580

122.990

190

2.690

1.840

147.770

Venezuela

456.910

196.020

154.650

2.220

120

103.900

SOUTH AMERICA

8.029.040

4.061.620

2.722.350

433.040

2,820

1.880

807.340

Total

9.181.160

4.543.090

2.943.060

449.440

10,450

16,160

1.218,950

Numbers may not tally due to rounding - these figures are taken directly from Table 7c in F.AO 1 194.1} but have been converted from ha to sq. km.
(Sonne: FAO 1 993 1

Total forest cover in Africa as of 1990 is 5.280.000 sq. km
(30 per cent of the world's total) and in Asia and the Pacific
there are 3.110.000 sq. km (18 per cent). Considering only the
three zones covered in the country chapters of this Atlas, the
cover in Africa is 3,730,000 sq. km and that in Asia and the
Pacific is 2,660.000 sq. km. The figures given for closed
broadleaved forests in the .state of logging tables in FAO 1993
(Tables 5a and 5b respectively) are 2,046,030 sq. km for Africa
and 2.342,3 l(J sq. km for Asia and the Pacific.

Average annual deforestation in all formations during the
last decade (1981-1990) is estimated to be 41,000 sq. km (0.7
per cent) in Africa and 39,000 sq. km (1.2 per cent) in Asia
and the Pacific.

Geographic Boundaries

The Atlas includes all countries within South and Central
America and the Caribbean lying entirely or mostly between the
tropics of Capricorn and Cancer. For example. Mexico is
included as at least half of its area is south of the Tropic of
Cancer, but Argentina and Chile are excluded as only a tiny pro-
portion of these countries lies within the tropics. Obviously
these lines are totally arbitrary as far as changes in the floristic
composition and structure of the forest go. but as noted above,
all but one of the countries included by FAO in its recent project
to assess forest cover in tropical countries (FAO. 1993) have
been covered here.

Introduction

Forests of the Region

The forests covered in this Atlas stretch from Mexico in the
north, down through the isthmus of Central America, to the
Pacific countries of Colombia. Ecuador and Peru; across to
Venezuela. Guyana. French Guiana and Surinam; through the
huge Amazon forest and into others in Brazil; and onto the
landlocked countries of Bolivia and Paraguay. Also covered
are the tropical forests throughout the islands of the
Caribbean. The area covered is vast, comprising 32 countries.
with a very varied relief and climate. This has resulted in a
great diversity of forest types and a wide array of species of
both flora and fauna.

The forest types of Central and South America and the
Caribbean vary from rain forest, occurring where there is no or
virtually no dry season, such as in southeastern Colombia, to
arid vegetation types where there is a very strong dry season,
such as the caatinga of northeastern Brazil and the thorn scrub
of northern Venezuela (Haffer. 1987).

Relief and Climate

The Amazon Basin lies at less than 200 m above sea-level and
flat, or gently rolling lowlands stretch from the eastern slopes
of the Andes to the Atlantic coast. In contrast, the Andean
Range tracks down the western side of the southern continent
reaching more than 6500 m above sea-level in Peru and
Bolivia. In northern Ecuador, the Andes split in two (the
Cordillera Occidental and Cordillera Central). A third
Cordillera (Oriental) emerges in the east, in northeastern
Colombia, running through northern Venezuela along the coast
of the Caribbean to Trinidad. The llanos lowlands of eastern
Colombia and Venezuela are separated from the Amazonian
lowlands by the Guiana Shield which extends from the middle
of the Guianas and southern Venezuela into southeastern
Colombia (Haffer. 1987 — see Figure 1.1). Central America
comprises a central backbone of mountains with lowlands
along the Pacific and Caribbean coasts. The Caribbean islands
are a mixture of continental, high volcanic and low limestone
islands. The first two categories have varied and often steep
topography, though all below 3200 m; the last, which have lit-
tle rainforest, are flat and generally arid.

Climate is also varied. Western Amazonia from the Andes to
the lower Rio Negro, and the Pacific lowlands of Colombia
have a warm, perhumid climate with two seasons of marginally
reduced rainfall. Easterly trade winds carry moisture from the
Atlantic Ocean and transfer it to the eastern slopes of the
mountains from Mexico, through northern South America, to
Brazil. A humid climate extends from northwestern Colombia
along the Caribbean slope of Central America north to southern
Mexico. The Pacific slope of Central America is mostly dry. A
reduced annual precipitation and a definite dry season are char-
acteristic of the seasonal climate found in northern and central
South America surrounding humid Amazonia. A dry tropical
climate is found in the Caribbean lowlands of northern
Venezuela and in northeastern Brazil; the narrow Pacific
coastal lowlands from southwestern Ecuador south are also
arid. The Caribbean islands have an oceanic climate, heavily
influenced by the moisture-laden trade winds. They are within
the hurricane belt, which has a significant influence on the
structure of the forests.

A number of different soil types occur under Neotropical
forests — each helping to support a distinct and recognizable
type of vegetation. For further information see chapters in
Whitmore and Prance (1987).

Table 1.2 Area of Closed Broadleaved Forest in Latin America
and the Caribbean as estimated by FAQ

Countn-

Costa Rica
Guatemala
Honduras
Mexico
Nicaragua
Panama
CENTRAL AMERICA

Belize
Cuba

Dominican Rep.
French Guyana
Guadeloupe
Guyana
Haiti
Jamaica
Martinique
Surinam

Trinidad/Tobago
CARIBBEAN

Bolivia
Brazil
Colombia
Ecuador
Paraguay
Peru

Venezuela
TROPICAL S.

Total

AMERICA

Closed Broadleaved Forest
(Area sq. km)

13.010
39.460
24.060
81.770
47,380
31,170
236.850

18.680

17.150

8.540

79.250

930

181.950

180

2.390

430

146.050

1.550

457.090

407.850
3.871.210

497.930

117.710
26,490

662,820

405.730
5.989.740

6.683.670

Numbers may not tally due lo rounding - these figures are taken directly from Table 5c in FAQ
(1993). but have been convened from ha to sq. km.
{Source: FAO 199.^)

EQUATOR

Figure 1.1 General relief map of tropical South America

ISmme: Haffer. 19871

Introduction

Water bodies
Mangrove
Montane forest
Submontane forest
Lowland moist forest
Dry forest
Pine forest
Swamp forest

Figure 1.2 Extent of the forests shown in this Atlas, compiled from the country maps

Forest Cover

The closed forest formations that are discussed in the following
country chapters comprise the lowland moist forests of the
Amazon Basin, the Guianas, the Colombian Choco, the
Brazilian Atlantic coastal forests and the Caribbean slope of
Central America; the submontane and montane moist forests of
the Andes, southern Venezuela and Central America; the exten-
sive pine forests of Mexico. Guatemala. Honduras. Nicaragua
and the Araucaria forests of southeastern Brazil; and the dry.
mostly deciduous formations found along the Pacific coast, in
central and southwestern Brazil, central and northern Venezuela
and throughout Central America (mostly along the Pacific
slope). Note that, although the very dry forests such as thorn
scrub, caatinga. cerrado and chaco are found throughout the
area within this study, these open formations are not mapped
and are only touched on briefly within the country chapters.
Moist and dry forest cover are also mapped for Cuba, Jamaica
and Trinidad and overviews given for the Lesser Antilles and
other Caribbean countries where no map data are available.

The extent of the forests illustrated in this Atlas are shown on
Figure 1.2. This regional compilation comprises an amalgama-
tion of the country maps shown in Chapters 10-33 and provides
a regional overview of the forest remaining in the Americas.

Forest Classification

This Atlas, along with the other two in the series, attempts to
achieve a synoptic view by combining the numerous forest for-
mations depicted on country maps into broader classifications.
In addition to the forest types in the previous two Atlases, sub-
montane forests, seasonally dry forests and pine forests have

been mapped here because of their ecological importance.

The broad categories depicted in this Atlas are suited to the
sub-regional working scales of L3 million mostly used here —
this is not the place in which to find a detailed delimitation of
the vast number of different forest formations, nor of their
floristic composition. It must also be emphasised that although
it is convenient for comparison to divide the forest types into
major groups, the exact boundaries are somewhat arbitrary. In
reality, natural vegetation types are rarely sharply bounded and
transitional formations are frequent.

With the previous Atlases it was possible to relate forest
cover to potential vegetation types, enabling the harmonisation
of forest types into the broad classification. It has not been pos-
sible to take this approach here, as a potential classification rele-
vant to South America. Central America and the Caribbean has
not been obtained. It has. therefore, been more difficult to rec-
oncile the different and complex forest categories used in the
various national source maps and to compare and contrast
across boundaries in the whole of the Americas.

To help with categorisation in South America, reference has
been made to the Unesco classification (Unesco. 1981). which
is based on mean annual rainfall, mean monthly temperature
and mean annual number of dry months, dividing the continent
into some twenty distinct climatic zones. For Central America,
the Holdridge Life Zone System (Holdridge, 1967), a forest
classification based on rainfall, temperature and altitude, has
been applied to those countries, namely Costa Rica and Panama,
where forest type information was unavailable or inadequate. In
Central America, where montane forests were not demarcated in
the source data, they were delimited by the 3000' (ca. 1000 m)

Introduction

cz?---'-

-y

0^-

-u

Degraded

mangrove

Degraded

montane forest

Degraded

submontane forest

Degraded

lowland moist forest

Degraded

pine forest

Qoud cover

No data

None of the above

'-=^

\ y

Introduction

contour taken from the Digital Chart of the World, which is
based on the Defense Mapping Agency Operational Navigation
Charts at a scale of 1 : 1 million.

Although, no overriding potential classification has been
rigidly adhered to, the categories attributed in the source maps
have, on the whole, been followed meticulously. On only a few
occasions has the information on the source maps been modi-
fied. For instance, a source map may have indicated that a par-
ticular stretch of forest was submontane and yet this has been
shown on the Atlas Map as lowland (e.g. see Chapter 25).
Where such modifications ha\e been made, it has been on the
basis of advice from independent reviewers within country and
the sources of the changes are cited in the Map Legends.
Indeed, the Map Legends in each country chapter, always give
full descriptions of which forest types "fit into" the broader clas-
sification depicted in this Atlas. The reader should also refer to
the forest descriptions given in the country chapters.

Table 1 .3 shows the major forest formations which have been
grouped into the categories shown in this Atlas. The forest types
shown on the Atlas Maps are italicised in the table. In some
cases, degraded formations have also been shown on the Maps.

Issues which Affect Forests in the Americas

As in the other two Atlases in this series, the tlrst part of this
volume deals with subjects that are relevant to the region in
general, rather than to particular countries, although several of
the chapters concentrate on South America rather than including
the Caribbean and Central America. In Chapter 2 the history of
the forests in tropical South America is analysed by use of the
pollen record. As in Africa, it is evident that there have been
considerable changes in forest extent as the climate of the world
has altered over time. During dry periods in the Quaternary, the
forests were considerably less extensive than they are today.
Recent work on the distribution and conservation of plants and
birds are covered in Chapters 3 and 4 respectively. These chap-
ters could be particularly valuable and timely in enabling the
countries of the region to make informed decisions on the allo-
cation of land for conservation purposes.

The follow ing three chapters are more concerned with human
activities within the forests. In Chapter 5. the ways in which the
rich diversity of vertebrate fauna in the Neotropics has been
affected by people is discussed. This chapter emphasises that
the widely held assumption that a good community of trees is
necessarily equivalent to a healthy fauna population is falla-
cious. The number of large forest-living vertebrates killed, even
by indigenous hunters, can be enormous, and with modern
weapons the numbers rise considerably, so that the forests can
be left severely depleted of species. Chapter 6 outlines the history
of human colonisation in The Americas and details the pres-
sures imposed on the indigenous people, from as far back as the
arrival of Europeans in the region 500 years ago, to the present
day. Chapter 7 deals with the affects of the colonisation policies
in the Amazonian countries of Brazil, Bolivia. Peru. Ecuador.
Colombia and Venezuela. The final conclusion in this chapter is
that the colonisation schemes in these countries have caused
enormous social and environmental problems and have yielded
only modest benefits.

Chapter 8 examines the protected areas in America. The con-
clusions of this chapter are. in general, quite optimistic. On the
whole, the countries of the Americas have fairly extensive pro-
tected area systems, new areas are being added and legislation is
good. Although the difficult economic conditions means that
finance for and, consequently, management of. the areas is often

Table L3 Forest types show n on the Maps in this Atlas

DRYLAND MOIST FORESTS

Louiand luoisi forest

tropical evergreen rain forest
tropical semi-evergreen rain forest
tropical semi-deciduous forest
tropical humid forest
tropical perhumid forest
riverine/gallery forest
evergreen seasonal forest
semi-evergreen seasonal forest

Suhinonlane forest

lower montane moist forest
lower montane wet forest
lower montane rain forest

MoiUane forest

montane wet forest
montane rain forest
cloud forest

DRYLAND DRY FORESTS

Dry forest

dry deciduous forest
xerophytic forest
tropical dry forest
dry evergreen forest
dry semi -evergreen forest

Pine forest

pine and oak forest
oak and pine forest
conifer forest

WETLAND MOIST FORESTS

Mangrove forest

S» amp forest

palm swamp forest
marsh forest

lacking, the conservation community, in both governmental and
non-governmental organisations, is very concerned with the
well-being of these areas.

In the concluding chapter on the future of forests in the
Americas, it is suggested that, although it may be too late to
save the forests in some of the smaller Caribbean and Central
American countries, there is room in South America, at least, to
conserve the forests and, with productive, sustainable and inten-
sive agricultural practices, still have the expanding economy
which is essential for the countries concerned.

We have tried to situate conservation initiatives in their
broader political, social and economic context. The generally
low demographic pressure, the potential of a vigorous private
sector to drag South American economies out of their stagnation
of recent decades and the long-awaited emergence of democratic
processes in several important countries have all led us to con-
clude that prospects for the conservation and rational use of
forests in the Neotropics are more favourable than prospects in
Asia and Africa.

Introduction

Country Studies

The country chapters in Pari II of the Atlas follow the same tor-
mat as those in the Asian and African volumes in examining the
situation in each country in detail. As far as possible, the
authors are nationals or long-term residents of the countries
concerned. Where local authors could not be found, local per-
spectives have been retlected in the text by seeking reviewers
within the country concerned. Many of the original texts were in
Spanish or were written by people whose native language was
not English. The editing, after translation, has therefore been a
more complex process than for the Asian and African volumes.
It is hoped, however, that the spirit of the original authors' con-
tributions have been retained.

Basic statistics are provided at the head of each chapter. In
this volume both country and land area are given — the latter
excludes bodies of water in the country; these figures are from
FAO (1989) — except for Guyana (see Chapter 29) and
Surinam (see Chapter 32). It is the land area figure that is used
in calculations such as per cent forest cover. Demographic and
economic data are from the 1994 World Population Data Sheet
compiled by the Population Reference Bureau in Washington
(PRB. 1994) or. in the case of French Guiana, the figures were
supplied by PRB from their unpublished data. Forest cover sta-
tistics from FAO (1993) are compared with those measured
from the Maps shown in this Atlas. However, as explained
above, it is not always entirely clear if like is being compared
with like as far as the definitions of forest goes. As in the
African Atlas (Sayer et al.. 1992). for countries where source
maps were very old or appeared to be particularly sketchy, sta-
tistics have not been derived from the Maps shown here as these
would probably be misleading. Figures for annual deforestation
are from FAO (1993), calculated for forest in the tropical rain
forest, moist deciduous and hill and montane zones only.
Forest product information is from the 1994 FAO Yearbook:
Forest Products (FAO. 1994) and includes the following;

Industrial roundwood this is wood in the rough, i.e. in its natural
state as felled or otherwise harvested. It includes wood removed
from the outside, as well as inside, forests. The commodities
included are sawlogs and veneer logs, pulpwood. other industri-
al roundwood and, in the case of trade, chips and particles and
wood residues. The statistics include recorded volumes as well
as estimated unrecorded volumes.

Fuelwood and charcoal both coniferous and non-coniferous
wood are included.

Processed wood the figures given are aggregates of the figures
in FAO (1994) for sawnwood and wood-based panels. The
sawnwood may be planed or unplaned and it generally exceeds
5 mm in thickness. The wood-based panels include veneer
sheets, plywood, particle board and fibreboard.

In cases where countries have not reported to FAO. the infor-
mation supplied in the Yearbook has been taken from national
yearbooks, from reports, from unofficial publications or has
been estimated by FAO (FAO. 1994).

As in the other volumes, most chapters follow a standard for-
mat with a preliminary overview and an introduction giving
general geographical, climatic, population and economic details;
followed by a brief botanical description of the major forest for-
mations. The following section reports on the management of
the forests, and on the extent of forest in the country. As there

are frequently discrepancies between the estimates of remaining
forest given in the various sources used, an attempt is made to
resolve the differences. They are frequently due to the use of
different definitions of the term forest or to changes over time.
Similar problems occur in the section on deforestation within
the country. Number of vertebrate species and information on
some of the threatened ones are generally given next, followed
by information on the conservation areas within the country
and, finally, reports of some initiatives to protect the forests and
fauna are included.

Maps

Cartographic data for all the eighteen countries in Central and
South America that are covered in this Atlas have been located.
However, for the fourteen Caribbean countries included here,
maps showing forest cover were found for only three. These
country maps accompany the country texts, which explain in
more detail the tloristics of the forest types which have been
harmonised into the broad forest classes shown on the maps. It
is important that the maps are referred to in conjunction with the
explanatory Map Legends which have been compiled for each
map and are located at the end of each chapter. These legends
explain the sources, date, scales etc. of the source data and how

Forests of the Peninsula de Paria National Park — one
of the areas with the highest degree of endemisin in Venezuela

Chris Sharpe

Introduction

the primary data have been harmonised.

The forest data are "fitted" to country outHnes and river sys-
tems provided by MundoCart, a digital world topographic data-
base produced by Pelroconsultants Ltd, compiled from The
Defence Mapping Agency's 1: 1 million Operational
Navigation Charts. Figures for the areas of different forest types
have been derived from these Maps using a Geographic
Information System (GIS). Boundary data for conservation
areas within lUCN's categories I-IV have been digitally overlain
onto the Maps. Where boundary data were not available, the
protected areas have been located by a centre point derived from
latitude and longitude information held within the WCMC pro-
tected areas tabular database.

The designation of the geographical entities in this Atlas do

not imply the expression of any opinion on the part of WCMC,
lUCN. or any sponsoring organisation concerning the legal sta-
tus or the delimitation of borders of any country depicted.

Availability of Data

The spatial data recorded in this volume are maintained at the
World Conservation Monitoring Centre, Cambridge, U.K on the
Biodiversity Map Library, a GIS designed to house and analyse
biodiversity information. The.se data are available in digital or
hard copy form for those interested. It is essential that these data
are updated and WCMC would appreciate any comments on or
updates of the datasets. The Centre will be pleased to collabo-
rate with organisations wishing to use the data in the interest of
nature conservation.

References

Collins, N.M.. Sayer. J. A. and Whitmore, T. (1991). The
Conservation Atlas of Tropical Forests: Asia. Macmillan.
London.

FAO ( 1988) An Interim Report on the State of Forest Resources
in the Developing Countries. FAO, Rome, Italy.

FAO (1989). FAO Production Yearbook Volume 42. FAO.
Rome, Italy.

FAO ( 1993). Forest resources assessment 1990: Tropical coun-
tries. FAO Forestry Paper 1 12. FAO. Rome, Italy.

FAO (1994). FAO Yearbook: Forest Products 1 98 1 -1992. FAO
Forestry Series No. 27, FAO Statistics Series No. 116. Food
and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, Rome.
Italy

Haffer, J. (1987). Quaternary history of tropical Africa. In:
Biogeography and Quaternary History in Tropical America.
Whitmore. T.C. and Prance, G.T. (eds). Clarendon Press.
Oxford. Pp 1-18.

Holdridge, L.R. (1967). Life Zone Ecology. Tropical Science

Centre. San Jose, Costa Rica
PRB (1994). 1994 World Population Datasheet. Population

Reference Bureau Inc., Washington, D.C., U.S.A.
Sayer, J. A., Harcourt, C.S. and Collins, N.M. (1992). The

Consenation Atlas of Tropical Forests: Africa. Macmillan,

London. Pp. 1-288.
Unesco (1981 ). Vegetation map of South America: E.xplanatoiy

notes. Unesco, Paris. Pp. 1-189
Whitmore. T.C. and Prance, G.T. (eds) (1987). Biogeography

and Quaternary History in Tropical America. Clarendon

Press, Oxford. 214 pp.

Authors: Caroline Harcourt and Clare Billington. WCMC.
Cambridge and Jeff Sayer, lUCN, with contributions from
Martin Jenkins. Cambridge.

2 The History of the Forests
and Chmate of Tropical
South America

Introduction

The tropical forests of South America have a complex and
dynamic history and many of the changes that have taken place
over time can be deduced by a study of the pollen record. The
history of South America's upper montane forests, in particular,
is well documented by pollen records. The extremely long
pollen records from the former lake of Bogota are particularly
important, revealing a wealth of information on the develop-
ment of the Andean forests during the Late Tertiary and
Quaternary. The latter period covers the last 2.5 million years or
so. and is characterized by the repeated occurrence of ice ages at
high latitudes. The pollen records of Bogota show that the
Andean forests during the late Pliocene were of a markedly dif-
ferent composition from those that occur in the area today. They
show correlations with glacial advances and retreats in the polar
regions (see, for example. Van der Hammen and Gonzalez,
1960: Hooghiemstra, 1984. 1989).

Pollen records covering the past 15,000 years have been
obtained from between 2500 m and 4200 m elevation in the
Eastern and Central Cordilleras of Colombia (e.g. Melief, 1985;
Salomons, 1986; Kuhry, 1988) and the Venezuelan Cordillera
(e.g. Salgado-Labouriau et al., 1977). These records show
details of the environmental changes of the upper montane
forests and their relation to climatic change.

In contrast, the history of the lower montane forest belt,
extending from about 1000 m to 2300 m elevation, and the
warm tropical lowland forest belt, extending from sea level to
around 1000 m in elevation, is considerably less well documented.
Suitable locations to study the history of these two forest types,
which are recorded in the pollen in peat bogs and accumulated
sediments on lake bottoms, are less easy to find. An additional
problem in palynological studies at lower elevations is caused
by the very rich vegetation: the variety of fossilized pollen
grains and fern spores encountered is so high that it is more dif-
ficult to deduce past vegetation types.

Important studies of the biogeography and Quaternary history
of South American forests include those by Fittkau et al.
(1968-1969), Van der Hammen (1974), Livingstone and Van
der Hammen (1978), Vuillemier and Monasterio (1986) and
Whitmore and Prance (1987). Good reviews of research on the
natural resources of Neotropical forests include those by

Meggers et al. (1973), Unesco (1978), Prance (1982a), Lieth
and Werger (1989) and Gentry ( 1990).

Quaternary History of Andean Forests

Knowledge of the history of the Andean forests during the
Quaternary is based mainly on the long pollen records from
Lake Bogota. These are representative of that part of the north-
em Andes that lies within the tropical zone. The foothills in this
part of the Andes now have a warm tropical climate, but the
upland regions have a cool to cold climate and at the highest
levels there is perpetual snow.

Large diurnal temperature fluctuations are characteristic of
tropical mountain ranges. Temperatures do not vary seasonally
to any great extent and, given sufficient humidity, most plants
are evergreen. This includes the trees near the upper forest limit.

The altitudinal vegetation zones of the Eastern Cordillera of
Colombia provide a good example of the general situation in the
tropical Andes north of the equator (Figure 2.1). The Eastern
Cordillera of the northern Andes rises up from the tropical low-
lands, where rain forests, savannas, or xerophytic vegetation
types dominate. To the northeast of this Cordillera lies the
savanna area of the Llanos Orientalis and the Orinoco, and to
the south east lies the rain forest. West of the Cordillera is the
Magdalena valley, the northern part of which supports rain for-
est, while in the southern part, tropical xerophytic vegetation or
dry forest is found. In the Eastern Cordillera the warm tropical
vegetation belt extends from the lowlands to around 1000 m. At
about this elevation several "tropical" taxa, such as most
Bombacaceae, disappear. Several other taxa are restricted in
their occurrence to this belt or to a part of it (e.g. Byrsonima,
Iriartea. Mauritia and Spathiphyllum).

The next altitudinal zone is that of the sub-andean forest
from approximately 1000 m to 2300 m. Genera such as
Acahpha, Alchoniea and Ceciopia are of frequent occurrence
in this zone and do not extend beyond its upper limit. The same
holds for many Palmae, Hyeroninui. Ficus and Malpighiaceae.
From about 2300 to 3200-3500 m elevation lies the Andean for-
est belt, in which species of Weinmannia and Quercus dominate
(Figure 2.2). AInus. Clusia. Hedyosmum Ilex, Jiiglans. Myrlca,
Podocarpus. Rapanea and Styloceras are frequently represented.

The History of the Forests and Climate of Tropical South America

PRESENT

20,000-14,000 yr BP

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000 ■

warm tropical loresl

• high plain ol Bogota * Magdalena River /^/ xerophytic vegetation -•- upper forest line

Figure 2.1 Schematic presentation of the zonation of the main vegetation behs in the Colombian Andes during present-day conditions
(interglacial) and during ice age (glacial) conditions about 18.000 years ago. i.Suorn- ArierVandcrHammen. I974i

although most of these genera are not restricted in their distribu-
tion to this belt.

The next vegetation zone, extending from approximately
3200 to 3500 m elevation, is the irregular belt of high Andean
dwarf forest and shrub formations, and the sub-paramo. The for-
est trees of the genera Weinmannia and Querciis are absent and
the most common woody taxa belong to the Compositae,
Ericaceae. Aragoa, EscaUonia, Hypericum and Polylepis.
Above this, the paramo extends from about 3500 m up to 4000-
4200 m elevation. Apart from grasses, the most characteristic
elements of the paramo are stem-rosette plants of the genus
Espelelia. and a number of herbs, such as Bartsia, Gentiana.
Geranium. Halenia. Paepalanthus. Plataaf^o. Ranunculus and
Valeriana. The super-paramo belt extends upwards from 4000-
4200 m to the snow-covered zone.

In order to make the pollen diagrams more easily understood,
they are presented here as cumulative diagrams. They show the
variation with time of the percentages of the major ecological
groups of pollen: subandean forest elements, Andean forest ele-
ments, subparamo elements and paramo elements. It will be
clear that for correct interpretations one must take into account
the relationships between vegetation and pollen rain, and the
altitudinal ranges and ecologies of the individual taxa present.

The Andes have been subjected to great geological uplift
over the last few million years. This uplift has created new envi-
ronments at high elevations in tropical South America.
Resulting vegetation changes are recorded in pollen records
(Van der Hammen et al.. 1973). Open Andean vegetation devel-
oped, while the forest taxa adapted gradually to colder condi-
tions. During this Pliocene-Quaternary period of adaptation, the
sub-andean forest belt became wider and reached its present day
altitudinal ranges. New elements arrived successively in these
Andean forests: Heclyosmun and Rapanea approximately 4 mil-
lion years ago. Myrica about 3.5 million years ago. Alnus
(alder) 1 million years ago and Quercus (oak) around 0.3 mil-
lion years ago.

The pollen record of Funza, of which Figure 2.2 shows the
upper 220 m, demonstrates with amazing detail the immigration
of Alnu.s at a core depth of 257 m and presents direct biogeo-

graphical evidence of the immigration of important floral ele-
ments (Hooghiemstra. 1984. 1989). Alnus is a northern hemi-
sphere genus that apparently reached Colombia only after the
Panamanian isthmus had formed some 5 million years ago
(Keigwin. 1978). Much later, around 300,000 years ago,
Quercus also arrived via the Panama landbridge, and colonised
the area of Bogota. The difference in the time of arrival can
probably be explained by the pioneer qualities oi Alnus. which
disperses more rapidly than Quercus. a species of mature forest.
The relative frequency of Vallea and Weinmannia also changed
markedly during this period. Vallea was abundant in the Andean
forests up to about one million years ago and then decreased:
after this time it was replaced by Weinmaiuiia as a major ele-
ment of the Andean forest belt (Hooghiemstra, 1984, 1989). It is
likely that Quercus is still invading the original Lauraceae
forests and that it will eventually become a more significant
component of the flora if present day environmental conditions
persist.

The composition of the Andean forest belt obviously
changed considerably during the Late Pliocene and Quaternary
as a result of immigration and evolutionary adaptation. During
the Quaternary periods of glacial advance in northern Europe
and northern America, temperatures in the tropical areas were
reduced, resulting in a lowering of the position of the altitudinal
forest belts (Figure 2.1). During the warmest phases of inter-
glacials, the present-day upper forest line (c. 3200-3500 m alti-
tude) may have reached 3400-3600 m. and locally even 4000 m.
In contrast, during the coldest phases of the glacials it may have
descended to around 2000-1 800 m. The Funza pollen record
(Figure 2.2) clearly shows the shifting upper forest line follow-
ing the changes in temperature during the ice ages. The former
lake of Bogota was alternately situated in the Andean forest
belt, the sub-paramo and paramo belt.

Climatic and Forest Changes During the Past 30,000 Years

The last 30,000 years of the forest history in the northern tropi-
cal Andes is known from many pollen records: the 12 m long
pollen record of Laguna de Fuquene in Colombia (Van Geel and
Van der Hammen, 1973) is presented here (Figure 2.3). It shows

The History of the Forests and Climate of Tropical South America

ra. Colombia, 2550 m elevation)

Figure 2.2 Pollen diagram of the long pollen record Funza I from the high plain of Bogota (Eastern Cordi
showing the vegetational history of the last one million years or thereabouts.

Core depth (in metres) and age (in thousands of years) are indicated
at the left hand side of the diagram. For convenience, stage num-
bers (3 through 23) from the well known deep-sea oxygen isotope
stratigraphy, are indicated in the diagram. From left to right the
downcore representation of the following vegetation belts is shown:
sub-andean forest, Andean forest, sub-paramo, and paramo.

The graph of downcore changes of the percentage of total arbo-
real pollen (AP) shows oscillations that, in fact, represent vertical
shifts of the upper forest line over the mountain slopes. Red
coloured intervals have an upper forest line from 2550 to 3500 m
elevation and represent periods with a warm climate (interglacials).
Blue coloured intervals have an upper forest line from 1800 to
2550 m elevation and represent periods with a cold climate
(glacials). The inferred changes in mean annual temperature, at the
elevation of Bogota, are from about 6° to 15°C. The level of AP. on
which the boundary between interglacial and glacial periods is
based, shift around 45 m and 77 m core depth: these shifts are
approximations to account for distinct changes in the composition
of the Andean forest belt at those levels. The former lake of Bogota
desiccated c. 27,000 years ago, some 9000 years before the last ice
age reached its coldest conditions (compare Figure 2.1 ), causing a
hiatus in the pollen record. The samples at the top of the record are
of Holocene age.

(Source: after Hooghiemstra. 1984; Andriessen ef ul.. 1993)

very high percentages of Polylepis in the period from around
30.000-25,000 years ago. Taking into account its recent relative
pollen production, there can be no doubt that a very broad and
extensive Polylepis dwarf-forest zone was dominant on the high
plains near the tree line at 2550 m. Such an extreme dominance
of this species is not known from anywhere in the Andes today,
and suggests that special conditions of climate and/or soil
occurred at that time.

The period before 25.000 BP was characterized by cold and
humid conditions, with a maximum extension of the glaciers, a
higher tree-line and higher lake levels. Around 21.000 BP the
Polylepis forest had largely been displaced by open paramo. At
the same tiine the lake level fell markedly. This period, with an
extremely cold and dry climate, lasted until c. 14,000-13,000
BP, that is until the period of maximum glacial retrect at high
latitudes. At this time, forest colonised the area again, replacing
the paramo during the periods of minor glacial retreat. The
abundance of the shrubby pioneer species Dodonciea, which
grows on eroded soils, is characteristic of this period. This taxon
almost disappeared in the Holocene, and reappeared only during
recent periods of human disturbance.

Between the Guantiva glacial retreat, that lasted from about
12,400 to 10,900 BP, and the beginning of the Holocene there
was another cold interval, called the El Abra stadial (between 4
and 5 in in Figure 2.3), which began at around 10,900 BP. This
brief temperature depression is known from several Colombian
pollen records. The Holocene represented a return to full inter-
glacial conditions. Forests, dominated by Weininannia and
Quercus. invaded the area and sub-andean forest elements
reached Laguna de Fuquene, indicating that mean annual tem-
peratures must have been somewhat higher than present day
values. In several pollen records, a cooling of the climate is also
evident about 3000 BP.

The History of the Forests and Climate of Tropical South America

Loguna de Fuquene

(25B0ml . j> .

Disploc*menl of Fluciuorioos of

veqetolion io«ifs lol<e level Yeort at

Em f lemenls"'" 1-3 Subandean forest elemenls exi

Figure 2.3 Pollen record from Laguna de Fuquene (Eastern Cordillera. Colombia. 2580 m elevation) showing the vegetalional and climatic
history of the last c. 30,000 years. At the left hand side, a summary diagram shows the downcore contribution of the four main vegetation belts.
Records of selected pollen ta.xa are shown. At the right hand side the chronostratigraphy, vertical displacement of vegetation belts, and estimated

fluctuations of the lake level, are indicated. Smme: Aflcr Van Gecl and van der Hammen ( I97.1|

Forest History of the Amazon Basin

During the wet season, broad belts along the Amazon River and
its tributaries become inundated (see Box). The varzea forest
that occurs in these belts is adapted to flooding of up to several
months duration. The almost permanently inundated sites, such
as oxbow lakes and deep backswamps. may support 'floating
meadow" vegetation near the shores where the water is rather
shallow. The meadows may become more extensive when the
mean annual water levels are lower (Van der Hammen, 1986).
These more or less permanently flooded sites have vegetation
similar to that in the swamps of the Colombian lower
Magdalena valley.

Analysis of the sediments in Amazonian lakes show that
there have been periods of extensive spreading of the "floating
meadows", and all evidence points to coincidence with periods
of low water levels. In the sediments of the Amazon valley
itself, there are also considerable increases in grass pollen.
These are often associated with an abundance of Cecropia, a
pioneer tree which colonises thicker or "stranded" patches of

'floating meadows". Again, there are striking similarities with
developments in the lower Magdalena valley. The knowledge of
the sequence of relatively dry and wet periods in the Amazon
Basin during the last 10,000 years or so is based mainly on
work by Absy (1979. 1982), Absy et al. (1991). Urrego (in
press). Van der Hammen et al. (1992), Van der Hammen and
Absy (1994) and Van der Hammen and Cleef (1992). These
Holocene changes of river levels are certainly caused by
changes of rainfall, and may very well be linked to El Nino
events (Duefias. 1992; Van der Hammen and Cleef. 1992).

These recent changes in the vegetation cover and in precipi-
tation are trivial when compared with the changes that are
believed to have occurred in the Amazon Basin at earlier times.
The very dry periods that are thought to have occurred during
the Quaternary must have had far-reaching effects on the extent
of the Amazonian forests. These dry periods are believed by
some biogeographers to account for centres of endemism in. for
example, birds, lizards, butterflies and woody angiosperms
(Haffer, 1969, 1977; Vanzolini and Williams, 1970; Vanzolini,

The History of the Forests and Climate of Tropical South America

Western Amazonian Floodplains, a Variable and Dynamic Environment

Extensive areas of Western Amazonia are annually flooded
by rivers. It has. for example, been estimated that river flood-
plains cover 12 per cent of Amazonian Peru (Salo et cil.,
1986). The width of the floodplains along the major river
courses varies a lot. from a few hundred meters up to scores
of kilometres. The largest floodplains are found in areas that
are subsiding because of tectonic movements related to the
uplift of the Andean mountains. These sinking areas form the
basins of the Madre de Dios, Ucayali. Acre and Pastaza-
Maraiion Rivers (Riisiinen et al.. 1987).

The rivers that erode the slopes of the Andes carry large
quantities of sediments. When they enter the flat Amazonian
lowlands, especially the basin areas, the velocity of the water
slows down and a considerable amount of the sediment load
is deposited. The result is that relatively loose and fine-
grained fluvial sediments accumulate in the lowland areas.
These easily erodible sediments and the flat tenain allow the
rivers to move around freely in search of the least resistant
routes.

Erosion and sediment deposition along a meandering river
channel results in lateral migration of the channel. The move-
ment can be very rapid: a maximum annual migration rate of
160 meters has been reported from the Ucayali river in Peru
(Kalliola et ai. 1992). However, the actively growing phase
of any one meander lasts for only relatively short periods of
time. When the loop grows rounder, its neck gets thinner,
until the river ultimately breaks through and a new cut is
formed. The abandoned loop becomes an oxbow lake. These
are a conspicuous component of active floodplains. The
processes of river meandering and annual flooding also form
characteristic sequences of relatively higher ridges and lower
swales parallel to the river.

The rate of channel migration varies significantly both in
time and place. The straighter parts of a river are generally
fairly stable, but the migration is very fast in the apices of
meander loops. The erosion rates vary also between different
river types. Suspension-rich white water rivers originating
from the Andes are more active compared to stable black
water rivers that drain only lowland areas.

The very rapidly changing geomorphology of the flood-
plains has a pronounced influence on the vegetation. Old for-
est is destroyed at the eroding bank, while primary succes-
sion takes place at the advancing beaches. When the point-
bars are exposed after the annual flood, their higher parts
become rapidly vegetated by pioneer species. During the sub-
sequent years, the annual pioneer species are replaced by
stronger competitors, and a series of belts of vegetation in
different stages of succession is formed from the point-bar
towards the meander neck.

The first successional stages are usually rather poor in
species. Young point-bar beaches are colonized patchily by
herbs and seedlings of woody riparian plants. Many of the
herbs, such as Ipoinoea spp., Fimbristylis spp., Liidwigici spp.
and Panicum spp.. are also found as weeds in nearby culti-
vated areas. Somewhat older vegetation is typically formed
by almost monospecific stands of first Tessariu imegrifolia
or Gynerium sagittatum and later by Cecropia spp..
Thereafter the vegetation gets more diverse in species and
structure. The first dominant trees are Cedrela odorata and
Ficiis insipida. but in older forests it is no longer possible to

distinguish clear zonation (Salo et al.. 1986; Kalliola et cil..
1987; Kalliola et al.. 1991 ). The boundary between older and
younger vegetation disappears partly because the relative age
differences get smaller and partly because tree senescence
and regeneration in gaps blur the pattern. Also the river activ-
ity itself can break the regularly sequential vegetation struc-
ture by erosion and by depositing sediment.

The above sequences of vegetation succession create the
basic level of heterogeneity of floodplain vegetation. Further
elements of mosaicism in floodplains are formed by different
vegetation patches in oxbow lakes and backswamps. Oxbow
lakes are slowly filled by fine sediments brought in by the
floods, and by debris from the surrounding vegetation that
accumulates in the lake bottom. First, the lake is covered by
floating plants such as Eichhornici crassipes and Pistia stra-
tiotes. The giant water lily Victoria ainazonica often occurs.
Later come floating grasses that are nevertheless rooted in
the soil. After those come stages of continuous herbaceous
vegetation and scattered woody vegetation dominated by
only a few species — P.seiidobomba.x iniingiiba is one of the
most important ones. Eventually more species rich and com-
plex forest finally conquers the former lake. Backswamps are
found further from the actual river channel, close to the mar-
gin of the floodplain. These areas are always poorly drained
and typically the vegetation is characterised by extensive and
almost pure stands of the palm Mauiitiafle.xuosa.

Sometimes tectonically induced tilting of the ground can
force a long stretch of a river channel abruptly to change its
location and abandon its old course. In the formerly active
channel area vegetation succession begins to advance more
peacefully. In contrast, the new channel area is exposed to
drastic changes (Kalliola et al.. 1991). Entirely new areas
become susceptible to the effects of river processes such as
floods and erosion, and in many places the vegetation will
experience a regressive succession: the forest declines and
herbaceous vegetation expands as a result of increasing
water levels. Even previously unflooded forests may
become flooded.

Perhaps the most outstanding consequence of river activity
is the splitting of the floodplain environment into a mosaic of
habitats different in relief, flood intensity, age and soil prop-
erties. It is also important to realize that the structure of the
mosaic is continuously changing and the direction of the
change is not readily predictable. A floodplain forest can be
eroded away by the river or regressive succession can turn
the forest into a grassland, or a backswamp appears, or per-
haps even the whole area remains outside the flood zone and
a new patch of terra-firme forest is formed.

The unpredictability of the floodplain environment extends
to the distribution patterns of species. For example, an excep-
tionally strong flood can wipe out species that otherwise
would be common at a site, or a certain kind or habitat can
emerge so far away from other similar patches that not all
species typical of the conditions are able to colonise the vea.

The understanding of river dynamics may give clues to
understanding unflooded terrain. Most of the surface sedi-
ments in western Amazonia are deposited in fluvial environ-
ments, and there are many signs of ancient river activity in
the soils of teiTa-firme forests.

Source: Kalle Ruokolainen and Maarit Puhakka.

The History of the Forests and Climate of Tropical South America

1973; Simpson and Haffer, 1978; Prance, 1978, 1982b).

The refuge theory, expounded clearly by Haffer in 1 969, pos-
tulates that vegetational changes following climatic changes
cause the fragmentation of species ranges and their isolation in
ecological refuges (Figure 2.4). In these refuges, species popu-
lations may (a) become extinct, (b) survive unchanged, or (c)
differentiate at subspecies or species level. The theory has been
much debated (e.g. Colinvaux, 1979, 1987) and several other
theories to explain centres of diversity and of endemism have
been put forward. These alternative theories include river
dynamics, temperature changes and contemporary ecological
differences between areas (Colinvaux et ciL, 1985; Salo er al..
1986). Whatever the cause, the palynological evidence now
available shows that savannas used to be present in areas that
are today covered with tropical forest. The pollen records from
Rondonia and Carajas illustrate this particularly well.

The pollen record from Rondonia (Figure 2.5) shows the
replacement of the Amazonian forest by grass-savanna (Van der
Hummen. 1972; Absy and Van der Hammen, 1976). Two frac-
tions of two samples from the Katira section were recently dated
(Van der Hammen and Absy. 1994). This part of the Amazon
Basin, under today's natural conditions, is completely covered
with dense tropical rain forest (annual rainfall around 2500
mm), and the nearest patches of more open natural vegetation
are found at least 150-200 km to the south. The savanna periods
of Rondonia are dated at 42.500-l-/-25()0 years BP and 18.500
-f-/-l50 years BP. The geological context suggests that the dates
correspond to two savanna periods, separated by a wetter forest
period. The last savanna period, at and after 18,500 BP. was
associated with thick coUuvial deposits in the valley and was
probably the drier period. We have no data from Rondonia as to
when the rain forest invaded the area again, but. based on data
from other places, this probably happened at the beginning of
the Holocene.

The pollen record from Carajas. Brazil (Figure 2.6) came
from the southern Serra do Carajas on a narrow plateau at
700-800 m elevation (Absy et al.. 1991 ). This region is situated
in a NW-SE oriented corridor inside the Amazon Basin where
the annual precipitation (1500-2000 mm) is lower than in adja-
cent regions (2000-3000 mm). In the rain forest sunounding the
plateau, relative seasonal dryness is reflected by the occurrence
of patches of deciduous trees. The pollen record presented
(Figure 2.6) is from a core drilled in the centre of a former lake,
situated on the plateau. The bulk of the present pollen supply to
the lake originates from the surrounding rain forest. The eight
pollen zones recognised correlate strongly with the lithological
sequence: in the sandy layers, pollen from savanna species dom-
inates (pollen zones Al. B and D), whereas forest species are
dominant in pollen zones from organic-rich sediments. The last
organic-rich deposition of Holocene age shows marked differ-
ences from its Pleistocene equivalents. The extension of savanna
around 6000 BP (pollen zone E2) represents a different type of
savanna vegetation. The abundant charcoal fragments suggest
that fire must have played an important role in the spread of
savanna at this time. The final increase of rain forest around
3000 BP (pollen zone E3) is reflected in the occurrence of
pollen from pioneer species.

The overall pollen record shows clear vegetational and cli-
matic change over the last 60,000 years. Dry periods occurred
around 60,000 BP, shortly before 40,000 BP and during
21,000-1 1,000 years BP. The drying of the lake after 22.000 BP
and before 12.500 BP, its reappearance slightly before I2,5(J0
BP and the subsequent rise of the water level during the Late

Glacial are events which have also been described for tropical
African lakes (Livingstone and Van der Hammen. 1978;
Servant and Servant-Vildary. 1980; Maley. 1987; Street and
Grove. 1979).

During the dry periods of the Quaternary, pollen representing
forest elements is less frequent and sometimes absent. Hence it
seems very likely that the forest disappeared, not only from the
plateau, but also from the surroundings of the plateau. The dri-
est parts of the dry Quaternary periods are not represented
because sediment no longer accumulated in the lake.
Considering the present distribution of Amazonian forest, the

^^s^-v^ti^

!*?!>

/ffr\-9.'-

^•^.

•*•>

mm-

kl'-'-'

'■^^^

. 4-. '■, :■

^^^

(3 tropical rain forest

^ savannas/(jry vegetation

■ montane vegetation

Figure 2.4 Maps of tropical South America, with present distribu-
tion of major vegetation types (a), and with a tentative reconstruction
of the situation during the driest phases of glacial periods, with forest
refuges (b).

Siimce: Adapted from Van der Hammen 11979); after Haffer ( 1977). Prance ( 1 97,1 ) and Huber

(1974)

The History of the Forests and Climate of Tropical South America

9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1 07,
1 00 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0%

18500 ± 150 BP

approximately
42500 ± 2500 BP

yellow-grey nT\l
sandy clay I- ■'■I

yellow brown and _— .
red clay with t^i

soil fragments '^^

black and dark p==j
grey clay ^3

grey clay [

Elements of the wcl trupical tt»rcst

1^1 '-

Savanna elements (principally Gramineae)

Figure 2.5 Pollen records from Capoeira (top) and Katira (bottom)
(Rondonia. Brazil, latitude 4'=S; longitude 6°W) in the Amazon Basin.
The diagram reflects a dramatic change from dense tropical forest
towards grass-savanna and vice versa.

Source: After Absy and Van der Hammen ( 1 976)

type of change registered at the end of the dry periods would
mean a lowering of at least 500 mm in the annual precipitation
(from 2000-1500 mm to 1500-1000 mm) in the drier
Amazonian corridor and eventually the fragmentation of the
Amazon rain forest area into two large parts.

Van der Hammen and Absy ( 1994) have mapped the poten-
tial distribution of rain forest in the Amazon Basin at an annual
precipitation of 500 mm (Figure 2.7b) and 1000 mm (Figure
2.7c) lower than at present (Figure 2.7a). As illustrated in
Figure 2.7c, the sites of Katira and Carajas. which experienced
savanna conditions some 20,000 years BP, would have been
located in savanna vegetation. Interestingly, the same figure
suggests that Georgetown would also have experienced savanna
conditions with precipitation reduced by 1000 mm. This conclu-
sion is supported by pollen records (Van der Hammen, 1963).
These data show that considerable areas of tropical forest were
once replaced by savanna and savanna woodland or cerrado
types of vegetation. It is highly probable, therefore, that the
Amazonian forest was, at times, reduced to a number of larger
and smaller fragments that could be called forest refuges.

Prehistoric .Man and Forests

People may ha'e entered South America as early, or earlier than
30,000 years ago, but good evidence of their presence exists
from about 15,000 years BP onward. It seems probable that
there have always been some people adapted to forest-life, but
many of the cultural remains from the period of the last glacial
advance are from groups adapted to more open environments.
During the past 15.000 years, people have produced some finely
worked stone artifacts, which suggest that they were hunting
large mammals. Humans will also have used the other resources

kQ.V''

>vs-'>

,c.^^

,-(\J*

2950 -^470/-440

6150 + 60/- 80 —

7760 +590/ -560

10460 +850/ -770

12520 +130/ -130

23670 +300/ -300

286B0 -^ 450/ -450

51200 +1700/- 1400 -~

.<;:t^r# ^.^<r ,..s<^^t^^^^ ,o.B^'

(f'

,os

mo at ids o n ws o o o los

( ! ) trees: (2) gramineae: (3) savanna elements: Compositae plus Borreria and Cuphea.

Figure 2.6 Simplified pollen record and radiocarbon dates of a 6.5 m long core from a swamp area in the Serra do Carajas (Brazil, lat. 6°20'S:
long. 50''25'W; 700-800 m asl). The downcore changing representation of trees, savanna elements and grasses reflects a sequence of open and
forested environments near Carajas during the last c. 50,000 years. Smm,: AiicrAbs> e;a/. (I99ii

The History of the Forests and Climate of Tropical South America

.tr-)a Present day raintull
cofgetown

Rainfall 1000 mm less
than today

^Gaorgtlown

E^3

LEGEND

Rainfall > 1500 mm
Tropical rainforest

Present day extension of
Amazonian rainforest

Rainfall < ISOOnim
Savannas, savanna woodland,
dry forest, coatinga, etc.

Figure 2.7 Maps of Amazonia showing the present-day situation of the vegetation (2.7a) and predicted changes of major vegetation forma-
tions when average ramfall is 500 (2.7b) and 1000 mm (2.7c) lower than at present. The sites of Carajas and Kalira. under savanna type vegeta-
tion some 20.000 years ago. are mdicated. The site of Georgetown also experienced savanna conditions during the last glacial advance.

Sonrcf: After Van Jlt Hanmu-n and Absy ( i 994 )

that the savannas and patches of trees in the South American
cerrados offered. It seems certain that the wooded areas were
altered by burning from very early on.

It is known that from as long ago as the Late Glacial, people
were adapted to the upper montane forest-paramo boundary.
This offered very diverse resources: small animals, fruits, etc.
(Van der Haminen and Correal Urrego, 1978). At that lime there
were also people living in the western Amazon (A. Rooseveld.
unpublished data) who made stone points and apparently used
the broad spectrum of fruit and seed resources which the forest
offered.

When the upper limit of the forest rose at the beginning of
the Holocene and open or semi-open vegetation types were
greatly reduced, people seemed to adapt to forest-life and to
using the numerous resources that the forest offers (roots, fruits.

nuts, meat, fish etc.). This happened both in the Andes and
Amazonia. The effect these people had on the forest may not
have been very great, but it seems to have led to an increased
frequency of useful trees and palms in both montane forests and
the tropical lowlands.

The impact of man on the forest increased with the beginning
of horticulture and agriculture; in some areas, this occurred as
far back as 8000 years ago. During the few thousand years
before the Spanish conquest (at around 1500 AD) the impact of
flourishing Indian cultures on the forest vegetation was consid-
erable. However, the action of humans became really destruc-
tive only after the conquest and has increased during the last
few decades to culminate in today's unprecedented rates of for-
est clearance.

The History of the Forests and Climate of Tropical South America

References

Absy, M.L. (1979). A Palynological Study of Holocene
Sediments in llie Amazon Basin. PhD thesis. University of
Amsterdam; 104 pp.

Absy. M.L. (1982). Quaternary palynological studies in the
Amazon Basin. In: Biological Diversification in the Tropics.
Prance. G.T. (ed.). Columbia University Press. New York.
Pp. 67-73.

Absy, IVI.L. and Van der Hammen, T. (1976). Some paleoeco-
logical data from Rondonia. southern part of the Amazon
Basin. Acta Amazonica 6(3): 293-299.

Absy. M.L., Cleef. A.M.. Fournier, M.. Martin. L.. Servant. M..
Sfeddine. A.. Ferreira da Silva. M.F.. Soubies. F.. Suguio. K..
Turcq. B. and Van der Hammen. T. ( 1991 ). Mise en evidence
de quatre phases d'ouvertures de la foret dense dans le sud-
est de FAmazonie au cours des 60.000 dernieres annees.
Comptes Rendues Academie de Sciences, Paris 312. serie II:
673-678.

Andriessen. P. A.M.. Helmens. K.F.. Hooghiemstra. H..
Riezebos. P. A. and Van der Hammen. T. (1993). Absolute
chronology of the Pliocene-Quaternary sediment sequence of
the Bogota area. Colombia. Quaternary Science Reviews 12:
483-501.

Colinvaux. P. A. (1979). The Ice-age Amazon. Nature 278:
399-400.

Colinvaux. P. A. (1987). Amazon diversity in the light of the
paleoecological record. Quaternary Science Reviews 6:
93-114.

Colinvaux. P.A.. Miller. M.C.. Liu. K-b.. Steinitz-Kannan. M.
and Frost, I. (1985). Discovery of permanent Amazon lakes
and hydraulic disturbance in the upper Amazon Basin.
Nature 3U:A2-45.

Dueiias. H. (1992). The Paleo ENSO record in the lower
Magdalena basin. Colombia. In: Paleo-ENSO Records
International Symposium. Lima. E.xtended abstracts: 81—85.
Ortlieb. L. and Machare. J.(eds). Orstom-Concytec. Lima.

Fittkau. E.J.. lilies. J.. Klinge. H., Schwabe, G.H. and Sioli. H.
(eds) (1968-1969). Biogeography and Ecology in South
America. Junk, The Hague: 2 Volumes. 946 pp.

Gentry, A.H. (ed.) (1990). Four Neotropical Rainforests. Yale
University Press. New Haven: 627 pp.

Haffer. J. (1969) Speciation in Amazonian forest birds. Science
165: 131-137.

Haffer, J. (1977). Pleistocene speciation in Amazonian birds.
Amazoniana 6(2): 161—191.

Hooghiemstra. H. (1984). Vegetational and climatic history of the
high plain of Bogota. Colombia: a continuous record of the last
3.5 million years. Dissertaciones Botanicae 79: 1-368.

Hooghiemstra. H. (1989). Quaternary and Upper-Pliocene
glaciations and forest development in the tropical Andes: evi-
dence from a long high-resolution pollen record from the
sedimentary basin of Bogota. Colombia. Palaeogeography
Palaeoclimatology Palaeoecology, 72: 1 1—26.

Huber. O. (1974). Le Savcuie Neotropicali. Institute Italo-Latino
Americano. Rome. 855pp

Kalliola. R.. Salo. J., and Miikinen. Y. (1987). Regeneracion
natural de selvas en la Amazonia Peruama 1 : Dinamica flu-
vial y sucesion riberena. Memoria del Museo de Historia
Natural "Javier Prado" 19A1-I02.

Kalliola. R.. Puhakka. M., Salo, J., Tuomisto, H. and
Ruokolainen. K. ( 1991 ). The dynamics, distribution and clas-
sification of swamp vegetation in Peruvian Amazonia. Ann
Sot Fennici 28: 225-239.

Kalliola. R.. Salo, J., Puhakka, M., Rajasilta, M., Hiime, T.,

Neller. R.J., Rasanene, M.E., and Danjoy Arias, W.A.

(1992). Upper Amazon channel migration.

Naturwissem.schaften 79: 75-798.
Keigwin. L.D. (1978). Pliocene closing of the Isthmus of

Panama, based on biostratigraphic evidence from nearby

Pacific Ocean and Caribbean Sea cores. Geology 6: 630-634.
Kuhry, P. (1988). Palaeobotanical-palaeoecological studies of

tropical high Andean peatbog sections (Cordillera Oriental,

Colombia). Dissertaciones Botanicae 1 16: 1-241. J. Cramer.

Berlin .
Lieth. H. and Werger. M.J. A. (eds) (1989). Tropical Rain

Forest Ecosystems: Biogeographical and Ecological Studies.

Elsevier, Amsterdam: 713pp.
Livingstone, D.A. and Van der Hammen. T. (1978).

Palaeogeography and palaeoclimatology. In: Unesco,

Tropical Forest Ecosystems. A state-knowledge report:

61-90. Unesco. Paris.
Maley. J. (1987). Fragmentacion de la foret dense humide

africaine et extension des biotopes montagnards au

Quaternaire recent: nouvelles donnees poUiniques et

chronologiques. Implications paleoclimatiques et biogeo-

graphiques. Palaeoecology of Africa 18: 307-334.
Meggers. B.J., Ayensu, E.S. and Duckworth, W.D. (eds) (1973).

Tropical Forest Ecosystems in Africa and South America: a

comparative review. Smithsonian Institution Press,

Washington D.C.: 350 pp.
Melief. A.B.M. (1985). Late Quaternaiy Paleoecology of the

Parque Nacional Natural los Nevados (Cordillera Central).

and Sumapaz (Cordillera Oriental) Areas, Colombia. PhD

thesis. University of Amsterdam: 162 pp.
Prance, G.T. (1973). Phytogeographic support for the theory of

Pleistocene forest refuges in the Amazon Basin, based on

evidence from distribution patterns Caryocaraceae.

Chrysobalanaceae. Diphapetalaceae and Lecythidiaceae.

Acta Amazonica 3(3): 5-28.
Prance. G.T. (1978). The origin and evolution of the Amazon

flora. Intersciencia 3(4): 207-222.
Prance, G.T. (ed.) (1982a). Biological Diversification in the

Tropics. Columbia University Press. New York: 714 pp.
Prance. G.T. (1982b). Forest refuges: evidence from woody

angiosperms. In: Biological Diversification in the Tropics.

Prance. G.T. (ed.). Columbia University Press. New York:

pp. 137-157.
Rasanen, M.E., Salo, J.S.. and Kalliola. R.J. (1987). Long-term

fluvial perturbance in the Western Amazona basin:

Regulation by sub-andean tectonics. Science 238:

139V 1401.
Salo. J.. Kalliola. R.. Hakkinen. L.. Kukinen. Y.. Niemela. P.,

Phakka, M. and Coley. P.D. (1986). River dynamics and

the diversity of Amazon lowland rain forest. Nature. 322:

254-258.
Salomons. J.B. (1986). Paleoecology of volcanic soils in the

Colombian Central Cordillera (Parque Nacional Natural de

los Nevados). Dissertaciones Botanicae 95: 1-212. J.

Cramer. Berlin.
Salgado-Labouriau. M.L.. Schubert. C. and Valastro. S. (1977).

Paleoecologic analysis of a Late Quaternary terrace from

Mucubaji. Venezuelas Andes. Journal of Biogeography 4:

313-325.
Servant. M. and Servant-Vildary. S. (1980). L'environnement

quaternaire du bassin du Chad. In: The Sahara and the Nile.

The History of the Forests and Climate of Tropical South America

Williams. M.A.J, and Faure. H. (eds). Balkeiiui, Rotterdam.
Pp. 1.^.^-162.

Simpson, B.B. and Haffer. J. (1978). Speciation patterns in the
Amazonian forest biota. Annual Rf views of Ecology ami
Systematks 9: 497-5 1 8.

Street, F.A. and Grove, A.T. (1979). Global maps ol lake-level
fluctuations since 30.000 BP. Qiiaicrnaiy Research 12:
83-118.

Unesco (1978). Tropical forest ecosystems; a state-of-knowl-
edge report prepared by Unesco/UNEP/FAO. Unesco, Paris:
683 pp.

Urrego, L.E. (in press). A Holocene vegetational succession in
the middle Caqueta River valley (Colombian Amazonia).
Colombia Amazonica.

Van Geel. B. and Van der Hammen. T. (1973). Upper
Quaternary vegetational and climatic sequence of the Fuquene
area (Eastern Cordillera. Colombia). Palaeogeogruphy
Palaeoclimatology Palaeoecology 14: 9-92.

Van der Hammen, T. (1963). A palynological study on the
Quaternary of British Guiana. Leidse Geologische
Mededelingen 29: 125-180.

Van der Hairimen, T. (1972). Changes in vegetation and climate
in the Amazon basin and surrounding areas during the
Pleistocene. Geologic en Mijnhouw 51: 641-643.

Van der Hammen. T. ( 1974). The Pleistocene changes of vege-
tation and climate in tropical South America. Journal of
Biogeography 1 : 3-26.

Van der Hammen. T. (1979). Changes in life conditions on
earth during the past one million years. Kongelige Danske
Vidcnskabcrnes Selskah. Biologiske Skrifter 22(6): 22pp.

Van der Hammen, T. (1986). Fluctuaciones Holocenicas del
nivel de inundaciones en la cuenca del bajo Magdalena-
Cauca-San Jorge (Colombia). Geologia Norandina 10: 11-18.

Van der Hammen, T. and Gonzalez, E. (1960). Upper
Pleistocene and Holocene climate and vegetation of the
Sabana de Bogota (Colombia). Leidse Geologische
Mededelingen 25: 261-315.

Van der Hammen, T. and Correal Urrego, G. ( 1978). Prehistoric
man on the Sabana de Bogota: data for an ecological prehis-
tory. Pulaeogeography Palaeoclimatology Pcdaeoecology
25: 179-190.

Van der Hammen. T., Werner, J.H. and Van Dommelen, H.
(1973). Palynological record of the upheaval of the northern
Andes: a study of the Pliocene and Lower Quaternary of the

Colombian Eastern Cordillera and the early evolution of its
high- Andean biota. Revie-iv of Palaeohotany and Palrnology
16: 1-122.

Van der Hammen, T., Duivenvoorden, J.F., Lips, J.M., Urrego.
L.E. and Espejo, N. (1992). Late Quaternary of the middle
Caqueta River area (Colombian Amazonia). Journal of
Quaternary Science 7( 1 ): 45-55.

Van der Hammen, T. and Absy, M.L. ( 1994). Amazonia during
the last glacial. Pulaeogeography Palaeoclimatology
Palaeoecology 109.

Van der Hammen, T. and Cleef, A.M. (1992). Holocene
changes of rainfall and river discharge in northern South
America and the El Niiio phenomenon. Erdkunde: 46:
252-256.

Vanzolini, P.E. (1973). Paleoclimates, relief, and species multi-
plication in equatorial forests. In: Tropical Forest
Ecosystems in Africa and South America: a comparative
review. Meggers, B.J., Ayensu, E.S. and Duckworth, W.D.
(eds). Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C. Pp.
255-258.

Vanzolini, P.E. and Williams, E.E. (1970). South American
anoles: the geographic differentiation and evolution of the
Anolis chrysolepis species group (Sauria. Iguanidae).
Arquivos de Zoologia (Sao Paulo) 19: 1-240.

Vuilleumier, F. and Monasterio, M. (eds) ( 1986). High Altitude
Tropical Biogeography. Oxford University Press, O.xford.
Pp. 649.

Whitmore, T.C. and Prance, G.T. (eds) (1987). Biogeography
and Quaternary History in Tropical America. Oxford
Monographs on Biogeography, 3. Clarendon Press, Oxford
Pp.214.

Authors: Thomas Van der Hammen and Henry
Hooghiemstra.Hugo de Vries Laboratory, Department of
Palynology and Paleo/Actuo-Ecology , University of
Amsterdam, The Netherlands. With contributions from Michael
Eden, Royal Holloway and Bedford College, London; Alan
Hamilton, WWF-UK; Tim Boyle, CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia;
and Kalle Ruokolainen and Maarit Puhakka, Department of
Biology, University of Turku. Finland.

3 Identifying Areas for
Plant Conservation
in the Americas

Introduction

Plants are the basis of most terrestrial ecosystems, and most ani-
mals, including humans, are ultimately totally dependent on
them as sources of food. They provide humans with a host of
other products, such as fuel, fibres, oils, medicines, dyes, tan-
nins and forage crops for domesticated animals. In addition,
they provide many valuable ecological services, such as the pro-
tection of watersheds, the cycling of nutrients and climate ame-
lioration.

However, plant life throughout the world, and especially in
the tropics, is under serious threat as habitats are destroyed or
modified. Raven (1987) used island biogeography theory to pre-
dict how many species of plants are under threat of extinction
worldwide. This theory predicts that if a habitat is reduced to a
tenth of its original size, this will lead to the extinction, or near
extinction, of half of its species. Raven's assessment is alarm-
ing: as many as 60.000 vascular plant species (one in four to
one in five of the world's total) could become extinct or their
populations seriously reduced by 2050 if present trends contin-
ue. Furthermore, Myers (1988) predicted that 17,000 vascular
plant species (seven per cent of the Earth's vascular plant
species) could become extinct in just 10 critical tropical forest
areas (or "hotspots") covering 0.2 per cent of the Earth's land
surface. Some of the richest areas he identified were in Latin
America.

Recent work has questioned some of these assumptions and
attempted to achieve greater precision in predicting extinction
rates (e.g. see Whitmore and Sayer, 1992). However there is
general agreement that a great loss of plant diversity is occur-
ring and that a considerable amount of this is in the Neotropics.

Plant Diversity and Endemism in the Americas

The Americas (South and Central America and the Caribbean
islands) are currently estimated to contain between 90,000 and
100,000 vascular plant species (or between 36-40 per cent of the
world's vascular plants) (Gentry, 1993). More than 60,000 vas-
cular plant species (c. 25 per cent of the total world flora) occur
in just three South American countries: Colombia, Ecuador and
Peru, while Brazil alone has been variously estimated as having
between 40,000 and 80.000 vascular plant species.

However, habitats, individual species and genetic variation

within species are not evenly distributed in these, or in other
areas, of the Americas. Effective conservation of biodiversity
therefore requires very careful selection of areas rather than a
random selection of sites that are unwanted for other uses. For
example, the Brazilian system of the 1970s that required farm-
ers to leave half their property uncut and to develop the other
half, thereby creating a chess-board effect, was never likely to
be an effective way of conserving the biodiversity of the
Amazon forest. Rather, careful consideration needs to be given
to the distribution and fragility of the various vegetation types in
the region, and to patterns of species diversity and endemism.
These factors are considered below.

Vegetation

The maps in this Atlas of necessity show only major forest for-
mations in each country and thereby give an impression of uni-
formity throughout the region. However, because of the great
variation in soil, geology, topography and climate, the Americas
are covered by a mosaic of many diffe:ent forest formations, as
well as other vegetation types. The forests vary from the
world's wettest in the Choco of Colombia, where up to 1 1,770
mm of rain has been recorded in one year (Gentry, 1982a), to
the lonws in the arid region of western Peru where it never rains
and the vegetation is sustained by mist alone. The forests are
also found at altitudes varying from sea level up to 3800 m
(Prance, 1989) where they meet the alpine vegetation of the
paramo and puna just below the snowline of the Andes.

Table 3.1 shows the number of basic vegetation types recog-
nised in some vegetation maps of South America. The two
large-scale maps of South America (Hueck and Seibert, 1972:
Unesco, 1981) use 88 principal formations, many more than is
possible in this Atlas. More recent maps of smaller areas shows
that even these are vast over-simplifications of the actual vege-
tation. For example, Huber and Alarcon (19881 used 150 cate-
gories for Venezuela alone.

It is important to recognise that each type of vegetation con-
tains a unique assemblage of species. For example, most of
Amazonia is covered by various types of tropical rain forest on
different substrates, each substrate giving rise to a different
assemblage of species. Furthermore, some forests, such as

Identifying Areas for Plant Conservation in the Americas

Table 3.1 Number of vegetation types identified in various
vegetation maps of South America.

Source

Categories

Region

Hueck and Seibertt 1972)

South Arnerica

Unesco (19811

South America

IBGE(1988)

Brazil

ProjetoRADAlVI(1975)

Brazil 45-60°W

FolhaSB21

4-8'S

Huber and Alarc6n( 1988)

150

Venezuela

vcirzea (or tahuampa), are subject to seasonal flooding, and
species composition varies between those forests inundated by
nutrient-poor black-water rivers and those which are seasonally
inundated by richer white-water rivers.

Some forest formations cover large areas and are likely to be
conserved adequately within any plan for conservation.
However, other vegetation types are found only in small
restricted areas and may be severely at risk. Conservation of
these vegetation types requires careful planning to ensure that
they are not lost. For example, within Amazonia there are several
types of vegetation (Amazon caatiiigci. ciinipinci and resringa)
on pure white sand which contain many endemic species, espe-
cially in the upper Rio Negro region. Not only will deforestation
of these white sand areas result in extinction of locally endemic
species, but their clearance also creates a semi-desert of exposed
sand over which forest is slow to regenerate. For example, areas
cleared by the Guarito culture some 800 years ago still have
large bare patches of soil (Prance and Schubart, 1978). ClearK
it is preferable to preserve intact forest over white sands. In con-
trast, the transition forests of south-western Amazonia have few
endemic species, low diversity, and are dominated by the multi-
use babassu palm (Orbignya phalerata) which often occurs in
dense single species stands. This is an example of an area which
is more appropriate for use and where the conservation of a rea-
sonable sample will ensure the survival of the plant species
which it contains.

In the Caribbean islands, the most luxuriant forests are those
at low elevations up to about 300 m above sea-level, although
truly evergreen, non-seasonal lowland rain forest does not occur
on the islands. Each type of climax forest has its own dominant
tree species, and floristic composition of the forests differ
between each of the major islands. However, as discussed else-
where in this Atlas (Chapters 10-15), most of the lowland
forests have been destroyed.

Bearing in mind that local variations occur, some general
comments can be made on diversity and endemism within the
main forest types of the Neotropical region.

Moist Forests

Lowland tropical moist forest is the most structurally and taxo-
nomically diverse vegetation type in the region. In general,
there is a strong correlation between the amount of rainfall and
diversity, with wetter forests being floristically richer than drier
types. The richest forests of all are the aseasonal lowland moist
and wet forests of upper Amazonia and the Choco region. These
forests hold two "world records" for plant species diversity. For
plants with a diameter of more than 2.5 cm in 0. 1 ha samples,
the world record site is in the Colombian Choco pluvial forests
(258-265 species); for plants with a diameter of more than 10
cm in 1 ha plots the world record is near Iquitos in Peru where

there were 300 species of this size in a sample of 606 individual
plants (figures from A.H. Gentry in Davis et al. in press).

Amazonian moist forests contain the highest number of
regional endemics, with an estimated 14,000 endemic species or
76 per cent of the Amazonian flora (Gentry, 1992). Most of
these species have wide distributions within Amazonia. In con-
trast, the "Mata Atlantica" forests of coastal Brazil have a high
local endemism, as well as a high regional endemism (73 per
cent for the latter).

Estimates of regional endemism for the Choco region are
around 20 per cent. For the northern Andean region as a whole,
including the coastal lowlands of western Colombia and
Ecuador and adjacent uplands. Gentry (1992) estimated over
8000 endemic species (about 56 per cent of the region's flora).
This area is one of the least known areas botanically, and it is
likely that there are several thousand more species awaiting dis-
covery. Most of these are likely to be endemic.

Endemism is not always correlated with diversity. Thus,
local endemism appears to be concentrated in "cloud forests"
along the base of the northern Andes and in adjacent southern
Central America, and in the north-western sector of Amazonia
where there is a mosaic of sedimentary substrates associated
with the Guayana shield (Gentry, 1986). The Andes montane

Mauritia flexuosa ( inauriria palm) hearing fruits which
are eaten by monkeys and humans. Tcmibopata Resene, Peru.

(WWF/Sylvia Yorath)

Identifying Areas for Plant Conservation in the Americas

The Manaus Workshop: Areas of Biological Priority for Conservation in
Amazonia

The aim of the workshop, which brought together almost 100
AiTiazon specialists, was to pool scientific data to indicate
areas of maximum biological interest and diversity in order
to help and encourage the planning of conservation areas
within the Amazon region. Representatives of all nine
Amazon countries attended.

The scientists began by working for three days in small
specialist groups covering Plant Systematics. Plant Ecology,
Mammals. Ornithology. Herpetology. Icthyology.
Entomology. Geomorphology and Climate, and Units of
Conservation. These first order discussions were intense
while participants exchanged their knowledge. At the end of
the three days, each of the seven biological groups produced
thematic maps, backed by scientific information forms, to
justify their selection of priority areas. This was followed by
separate meetings of all botanists and zoologists to pool their
data and consolidate their chosen areas on two maps; one for
plants and one for animals. Although the consolidation
process involved a great deal of discussion, the areas selected
by the different groups corresponded to a large degree. At the
same time, the geomorphologists and climatologists pro-
duced their map locating the most fragile soils and ecosys-
tems requiring greatest protection. The Conservation Units
Group discussed policy and other important factors for future

analysis and planning of preservation, conservation and man-
agement of priority areas.

The first step was the fusion of the 104 areas of major bio-
logical importance for plants with the areas selected for ani-
mals. This resulted in the production of a final map of 94
areas evaluated with a 5-1 scale of priority for conservation
(see Figure 3.1). Areas with maximum overlap between the
disciplines were given the highest priority.

The final map covered about 60 per cent of the Amazon
region, and together with the back-up material will provide a
much more logical basis for future conservation planning
throughout the Amazon region. It is encouraging that many
existing parks and reserves occur within the areas selected as
priorities at the workshop. However, the areas selected at the
workshop are broad regions, and now it is up to conservation
organisations of the nine countries to carry out on-site work to
define the exact areas that are suitable for different categories
of protection, managed forest, indigenous reserves, national
parks, ecological reserves and other conservation areas.

The results of the workshop are a challenge to governments
and NGOs of the developed world to mobilise the resources
needed for the establishment of the areas selected by the con-
servation agencies of the Amazon country governments.

Source: G.T. Prance

Figure 3.1 Biological Priorities for Conservation in Amazonia

Source: Conservation International ( 1 99 i )

Key

■

Highest priority for
conservation based
on biodiveniity
and endemism

■

ftiwity 1

S-y

Identifying Areas for Plant Conservation in the Americas

Orchid in Caiiaiiiui Nulioiuil Park. Vcuc.

uc/ii.

(WWF/Chris Elliot)

Colombia, and Ecuador are particularly rich in
and what little remains of these forests is under

forests of Peru
local endemics
severe threat.

In Central America, the greatest concentrations of endemic
species is in high mountains. For example, 70 per cent of the
vascular flora of high mountains of Guatemala and Mexico are
endemic (D'Arcy, 1977).

Dry Forests

Tropical dry forest is, by some estimations, the most acutely
threatened of all Neotropical vegetation types. In Central
America the area of strongly seasonal climate which gives rise
to dry forest occurs mostly along the Pacific coast in a narrow,
but formerly continuous band, from Mexico to the Guanacaste
region of north-western Costa Rica. There are also outliers far-
ther south in the Terraba Valley of Costa Rica, the Azuero
Peninsula of Panama and around Garachine in the Darien region
of Panama. In South America, more extensive dry forests occur
in northern Colombia. Venezuela, coastal Ecuador and adjacent
Peru, and from north-west Argentina to north-east Brazil. The
main area of dry forest is the chaco (encompassing the western
half of Paraguay and adjacent regions of Bolivia and
Argentina).

While dry forests are not as species-rich as moist forests,
they are floristically distinct and contain a high degree of
regional endemism. For example. 73 per cent of the flora of the
chcico-cenado-caatinga dry areas are regionally endemic. The
very dry. open forest types have not been mapped in this Atlas.

Centres of Plant Diversity and Endemism

Several theories have been advanced to explain patterns of diver-
sity and endemism in the Americas and why some areas of rain
forest, in particular, have higher degrees of endemism than oth-
ers. A popular theory is that the forest in South America was
reduced to isolated refugia during Pleistocene glacial advances
when the climate of the region became drier and cooler. Whether
or not they were refugia. the fact that centres of endemism exist
for a large number of different organisms (e.g. Haffer. 1969 and
Chapter 4 for birds; Brown. 1976. 1982. 1987 for insects; Prance.
197.3. 1979. 1982 for plants) has been well established (although
there have been suggestions that these apparent centres of rich-
ness are merely well-collected areas, see Granville. 1988: Nelson
et al.. 1990). The existence of centres of endemism certainly
makes conservation of these areas of prime importance since
their protection would conserve clusters of endemic species.

Other theories to explain spcciation in the region focus on the
previously more extensive "cloud forests" (Gentry. 1982b,
1989; Gentry and Dodson, 1987), speciation associated with
habitat complexity in north-western and north-central Amazonia
(Gentry, 1986. 1989; Gentry and Ortiz, 1993), speciation associ-
ated with riverine barriers to gene flow in the largest river sys-
tem of the world (Capparella, 1988; Ducke and Black, 1953),
and biogeographical theories focusing on the "Great American
Interchange" following the joining of South and Central
America approximately 3.1 million BP (Gentry. 1982b;
Marshall el al. 1979).

Centres of Crop Plant Diversity

It has long been known that some areas have been of particular
importance for the number of crop plants which originated
there. They are known as Vavilov Centres after the Russian sci-
entist who first described them. Four are located in the
Neotropics (Vavilov. 1951). The Mexican-Central American
Centre was the original source of such plants as cotton, ama-
ranth, sweet potato, maize, green peppers and Pliaseoliis beans;
the Peru-Ecuador-Bolivia Centre produced the potato, beans,
tobacco, papaya, quinoa. tomato and others; the Chilean Centre
yielded the strawberry and the Central Brazil-Paraguay Centre
was the home of the pineapple, peanut, mate, cashew and
cassava amongst others.

The areas where wild relatives of crop plants are likely to
occur are of prime importance for conservation. For example,
wild species are still contributing considerably to breeding pro-
grammes of potato and tomato, adding genes for such properties
as disease resistance, sweetness and hardiness. The areas of
importance for the contribution of plants of economic value are
not confined to the Vavilov Centres. For example, in recent
years attention has been drawn to the region of the Brazil-Peru-
Colombia frontier, the area inhabited by the Tikuna Indians.
Crops which have originated in this area include peach palm

Criteria for CPD Site Selection

The following broad set of criteria have been developed
following consultation with a large number of botanists
and conservation biologists worldwide.

To be selected as a CPD site, areas have one of the fol-
lowing characteristics;

1. the area is evidently species-rich. e\en though the
number of species present may not be accurately
known;

2. the area is known to contain a large number of
species endemic to it.

The following characteristics are also considered in the
selection:

a) the site contains an important gene pool of plants of
value to man. or plants that are potentially useful;

b) the site contains a diverse range of habitat types;

c) the site contains a significant proportion of species
adapted to special edaphic conditions:

d) the site is threatened or under imminent threat of
large-scale devastation.

Source: WWF/IUCN (1994)

Identifying Areas for Plant Conservation in the Americas

Table 3.2 List of CPD sites in the Caribbean and Central America

Country Code Site Name

Cuba Cb3 Cajalbana Tableland and Preluda Mt

Region

Jamaica CblO Blue and John Crow Mountains

Jamaica Cbll Cockpit Country

Mexico MA 1 Lacandon Rain Forest Region

Mexico MA2 Uxpanapa-Chimalapa Region

Mexico MA3 Sierra de Juarez. Oaxaca

Mexico MA4 Tehuacan-Cuicatlan Region

Mexico MA5 Canyon of the Zopilote Region

Mexico MA6 Sierra de Manantlan Region and Biosphere

Reserve

Mexico MA7 Pacific Lowlands, Jalisco

Mexico MAS Upper Mezquital River Region. Sierra

Madre Occidental

Mexico MA9 Gomez Farias Region and El Cielo

Biosphere Reserve

Mexico MA 10 Cuetras Cienagas Region

Country Code Site Name

Mexico MAI I Apachian-Madrean Region

Mexico MA12 Central Region of Baja California

Peninsula

Guatemala MA 1 3

Guatemala MA 14

Honduras

Costa Rica

Costa Rica
Panama

Peten Region and Maya Biosphere
Reserve

Sierra de la Minas Region and Biosphere
Reserve

MA 15 NE Honduras and Rio Platano Biosphere

Reserve

MA 16 Braulio Carrillo-La Selva Region

MA 17 La Amistad Region

Costa Rica MA 18

Osa Peninsula and Corcovado National
Park

Panama MA19 Cerro Azul and Cerro Jefe (in Chagres

National Park)

Panama MA20 Darien Province and Darien National Park

Figure 3.2 Centres of Plant Diversity in Central America and the Caribbean

Source: Davis et at. (in press)

Identifying Areas for Plant Conservation in the Americas

Table 3.3 List of CPD sites in South America* +

Country

Code

Site Name

Countn'

Code

Site Name

CARIBBEAN

Venezuela SAl Coastal Cordillera

guayana highlands

Venezuela SA2 Pantepui Region

AMAZONIA: Northeastern Amazonia-Guyana
French Guiana SA3 Saiil Region

Brazil SA4 Transverse Dry Belt'

AMAZONIA: Central and Guayanan Amazonia
Brazil SA5 Manaus Region

Brazil. Colombia. SA6 Upper Rio Negro Region

Venezuela
Colombia SA7 Chiribiquete-Araracuara-Cahuinari

AMAZONIA: Western Amazonia

Ecuador SA8 Yasuni NP and Waorani Ethnic

Reserve
Peru. Colombia SA9 Iquitos Region

AMAZONIA: Southwestern Amazonia

Peru SAIO Tambopata Region

AMAZONIA: Pre-Andean Amazonia

Peru SA 1 1 Lowlands of Manu National Park

MATA ATLANTICA: Northern Region (Rio Grande de Norte
to Bahia)

Brazil SAl 2 Atlantic Moist Forest of Southern

Bahia

MATA ATLANTICA: Central Region. Espirito Santo
to Sao Paulo

Brazil SAl 3 Tabuleiro Forests of Northern

Espi'rito Santo

Brazil SA14 Cabo Frio Region

Brazil SAl 5 Mountain Ranges of Rio de Janeiro

MATA ATLANTICA: Southern Region (Southern Sao Paulo to Rio
Grande do Sul)

Brazil SAl 6 SerradoJapi

Brazil SAl 7 Jureia-Itatins Ecological Station

MATA ATLANTICA: Interior: Parana Basin

Paraguay SAl 8 Mbaracayii Reserve

INTERIOR DRY AND MESIC FORESTS

Brazil SA19 Caatinga of Northeastern Brazil-

Brazil SA20 Espinha^o Range Region'

Brazil SA21 Distrito Federal

Argentina.

Paraguay.

Bolivia
Bolivia
Brazil

SA22

Gran Chaeo

Brazil.

SA23 Southeastern Santa Cruz

SA24 Llanos de Mojos Region

(Tropical) ANDEAN: Paramo with Espeletiinae

Colombia SA25 Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta

Colombia SA28 Los Nevados National Park

Colombia SA29 Central Colombian Massif

Colombia SA30 Volcanoes of Narinense Plateau

(Tropical) ANDES: Paramo without Espeletiinae

Ecuador SA3 1 Paramo and Andean Forests of

Sangay NP
Ecuador. Peru SA32 Huancabamba Region

Peru SA33 Peruvian Puna

(Tropical) ANDEAN

: Tucumano-Boliviano Region

Argentina

SA35

Anconquija Region

(Tropical) ANDEAN

: Eastern

Slope

Bolivia

SA36

Madidi-Apolo Region

Peru

SA37

Eastern Slopes of Peruvian Andes

Ecuador

SA38

Gran Sumaco and Upper Napo
River Region

PACIFIC COAST

Colombia

SA39

Choco Region

Ecuador

SA40

Mesic Forests on the Pacific Coast

Peru

SA41

Cerros de Amotape National Park
Region

Peru

SA42

Lomas Formations

Chile

SA43

Lomas Formations of Atacama
Desert

SOUTHERN CONE

Chile

SA44

Mediterranean Region and
La Canipana NP

Chile

SA4.S

Temperate Rain Forests

Argentina. Chile

SA46

Patagonia

* See Note on Table 3,2

South Atnenca has been divided phytogeographicaily (see names in bold on this Table)
according to the classification developed at the 1991 CPD Workshop in Quito, Ecuador,
not mapped in this Alias
will be mapped in more detail in Davis da!, (in press)

Bactris gasipaes. sapota Qiiaiaiilyea cordata. abiu Poiiteria
caimiro. biriba Rollinia mucosa, sachamanga Grias neiilyerthii.
uvilla Pouroiiina cecropiifolia and cubiu Solanum sessilifloruiii
(Clement. 1989). These and other fruit make the Tikuna area
one of extreme importance for conservation.

Identifying Areas for Conservation

Until recently, the various factors discussed above have not
been considered properly in conservation planning in the region,
although some conservation plans have taken into account
some, but not all, of the factors. For e.xample, a Brazilian plan
for the Amazon region, Wetterberg el al., (1976. 1981), used
phytogeographic regions (Prance, 1977) and proposed centres of
endemism as its main criteria. Highest priority was given to

areas where plant, insect and bird endemism overlapped, and
reserves were proposed within each region.

One recent initiative which considered all the various biolog-
ical factors for planning an effective conservation areas system
in Amazonia was a workshop held in Manaus, Brazil, in January
1990 (see Box 1). This brought together almost 100 biologists,
physical scientists, ecologists, and conservation planners and
resulted in a map indicating 94 areas of top priority for conser-
vation (Figure 3.1 ).

The WWF/IUCN Centres of Plant Diversity (CPD) Project

The identification of sites of top priority for plant conservation
is the objective of the WWF/IUCN Centres of Plant Diversity
(CPD) project. Started in 1989. CPD is a major international

Identifying Areas for Plant Conservation in the Americas

collaborative project, partly funded by ODA and the EC. The
results of the project will be published in late 1994, and will
provide a global analysis of centres of plant diversity and
endemism. indicating those areas which, if protected, would
save the majority of wild plant species (WWF/IUCN. 1994).

The CPD concept is related to that of the work by crop
geneticists in selecting centres of origin and diversity of crop
plants — the so-called Vavilov Centres of Crop Genetic
Diversity (Hawkes, 1983) described above. However, the main
criteria for selecting CPD sites are those of high plant species
diversity and/or endemism, while habitat diversity and the pres-
ence of important gene pools of plants are secondary criteria
(see Box 2).

A total of 232 sites worldwide meet CPD criteria and will
receive detailed treatment in Data Sheets. Other areas of botani-
cal importance, meeting the general criteria for selection as
CPD sites, will be included in the CPD publications, but these
other sites will not be treated in detail.

In practice, most sites selected in the CPD project have in
excess of 1000 vascular plant species, of which at least 10 per
cent are endemic to the phytogeographic region in which the
site occurs, and often a significant proportion of the total flora is
endemic to the chosen site.

The selection of CPD sites for Latin America buill upon ini-
tiatives such as that of the Manaus workshop for the Amazonian
region, and has involved the collaboration of numerous
botanists, botanical institutions and conservation organizations
throughout the region. The work of coordinating these efforts
has been undertaken by Olga Herrera-MacBryde at the
Smithsonian Institution for Middle and South America, and by
Dennis Adams in London for the Caribbean region, as well as
by Stephen Davis and Vernon Heyward in the lUCN Plant
Conservation Office. For South America, the work culminated
in a workshop held in Quito in June 1991 at which the final
selection of CPD sites was made.

Tables 3.2 and 3.3 list the sites selected for detailed Data
Sheet treatment for the Americas (Davis et al.. in press) and
they are mapped on Figures 3.2 and 3.3 respectively. These sites
are considered to be the top priorities for plant conservation.
Site codes in the lists below correspond to those used on the
maps in this Atlas but may vary slightly from those used in the
final CPC publication (Davis et ai. in press).

Conclusion

Conservation of these sites would not only save many of the
plant species that could be in danger of extinction, but could
also protect a wide range of other organisms which are depen-

SM!

— -^^

SA37 .'■■'" ;.,,■■-" ■
SAM """"
SAKl
SA.%

SA4.1 -

k„-

n 4a) ankm

Figure 3.3 Centres of Plant Diversity — South America

Source: Davis cr ttl. (in press)

dent upon the habitats that plants and natural vegetation pro-
vide. Their conservation may also provide local, regional and
national economies with sustainable longterm benefits through,
for example, ensuring a continued supply of plant foods and
other products, ecological services, such as the prevention of
soil erosion, and through attracting tourism.

References

Brown, K.S., Jr. (1976). Geographical patterns of evolution in
neotropical Lepidoptera. Systematics and derivation of
known and new Heliconiini (Nymphalidae : Nymphalisae).
Journal of Entomology B. 44: 201-242.

Brown, K.S., Jr. (1982). Paleoecology and regional patterns of
evolution in neotropical forest butterflies, pp. 255-308. In:
Biological Diversification in the Tropics. Prance, G.T. (ed.).
Columbia University Press, New York.

Brown, K.S.. Jr. (1987). Biogeography and evolution of
Neotropical butterflies. Pp. 64—104. In: Biogeography and
Quaternary History in Tropical America. Whilmore, T.C.
and Prance, G.T. (eds). Oxford Monographs on
Biogeography 3, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Capparella, A. (1988). Genetic variation in neotropical birds:
Implications for the speciation process. Pp. 1658-1664,
1669-1673. In: Acta XIX Congress International
Ornithology: Volume 2. Ouellet, H. (ed.). University of
Ottowa Press, Canada.

Clement, C.R. (1989). A center of crop genetic diversity in
western Amazonia. Bioscience 39: 624-630.

Davis, S.D., Heywood, V.H. and Herrera-MacBryde, O. (eds)
(in press). Centres of Plant Diversity: A Guide and Strategy
for their Conservation. Volume 3: The Americas. World
Wide Fund for Nature and lUCN — The World Conservation
Union.

D'Arcy, W.G. (1977). Endangered landscapes in Panama and

Identifying Areas for Plant Conservation in the Americas

Central America: the threat to plant species. In: Exiinction is

Forever. Prance. G.T. and Elias. T.S. (eds). New York

Botanical Garden. New York. Pp. 89-102.
Ducke, A. and Black. G. ( 1953). Phytogeographical notes on the

Brazilian Amazon. Anais-Academia Brasileirci de Ciencias

25(1): 1-46.
Gentry, A.H. (1982a). Phytogeographic patterns in northwest

South America and Southern Central America as evidence

for a Choco refugium. Pages I 12-136. In: Biological

Diversification in the Tropics. G.T. Prance (ed), Columbia

University Press. New York.
Gentry, A.H. (1982b). Neotropical tloristic diversity: phytogeo-
graphical connections between Central and South America.

Pleistocene fluctuations or an accident of the Andean orogeny.

Annals Missouri Botanical Garden 69: 557-593.
Gentry, A.H. (1986). Endemism in tropical vs temperate plant

communities. In: Conservation Biology. Soule, M. (ed.).

Sinauer Press, Sunderland, Massachusetts. Pp. 153-181.
Gentry, A.H. (1989). Speciation in tropical forests. In: Tropical

Botany. Larsen, K. and Holm-Nielson. L.B. (eds). Academic

Press, London. Pp. 1 13-134.
Gentry, A.H. (1992). Tropical forest biodiversity: distributional

patterns and their conservational significance. Oikos 63:

19-28.
Gentry, A.H. and Dodson, C. (1987). Contribution of nontrees

to species richness of a tropical rain forest. Biotropica 19:

149-156.
Gentry, A.H. and Ortiz, R. (1993). Patrones de composicion

floristica en la Amazonia Peruana. In: Amazonia Peruviana

— vegelacion humedo tropical en el llano suhandino.

Kalliola, R., Puhakka, M and Danjoy, W. (eds). Proyecto

Amazonia, Universidad de Turku, Finland/Oficina Nacional

de Evaluacion de Recursos Naturales. Lima, Peru.
Granville, J.J. de (1988). Phytogeographical characteristics of

the Guianan Forests. Taxon 37(3): 578-594.
Haffer, J. ( 1969). Speciation in Amazonian forest birds. Science

165: 131-137.
Hawkes, J.G. (1983). The Diversity of Crop Plants. Harvard

University Press, Cambridge. Massachusetts
Huber, O. and Alarcon, C. (1988). Mapa de la Vegetacion de

Venezuela. MARNR & The Nature Conservancy, Caracas,

Venezuela.
Hueck, K. and Seibert, P. (1972). Vegetationskarte von

Sudamerika. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart.
IBGE ( 1988). Mapa de Vegetagao do Brasil. Funda^ao Instituto

Brasileiro de Geografia e Estati'stica. Brasi'lia.
Marshall, L., Butler, R., Drake, R., Curtis, G. and Tedford, R.

(1979). Calibration of the great American interchange.

Science 204: 272-279.
Myers (1988). Threatened biotas: "hotspots" in tropical forests.

Environmentalist 8: 1—20.
Nelson, B.W., Ferreira, C.A.C., da Silva, M.F. and Kawasak,

M.L. ( 1990). Endemism centres, refugia and botanical collec-
tion density in Brazilian Amazonia. Nature 345: 714-716.
Prance, G.T. (1973). Phytogeographic support for the theory of

Pleistocene forest refuges in the Amazon Basin, based on

evidence from distribution patterns in Caryocaraceae,

Chrysobalanaceae, Dichapetalaceae and Lecythidaceae. Acta

Amazonica 3: 5-28.

Prance, G.T. (1977). The phytogeographic subdivision of
Amazonia and their intluence on the selection of biological
reserves. Pp. 195-213. In: Extinction is Forever. Prance,
G.T. and Elias, T.S. (eds). New York Botanical Garden.

Prance, G.T. (1979). Distribution patterns of lowland neotropi-
cal species with relation to history, dispersal and ecology
with special reference to Chrysobalanaceae, Caryocaraceae
and Lecythidaceae, pp. 59-88. In: Tropical Botany. Larsen.
K. and Holm-Nielson. L.B. (eds.). Academic Press. London.
New York.

Prance, G.T. (1982). Forest refuges: evidence from woody
angiosperms. In: Biological Diversification in the Tropics.
pp. 137—156. G.T. Prance (ed.). Columbia University Press,
New York.

Prance, G.T. (1989). American tropical forests. In: Ecosystems
of the World I4B: Tropical Rain Forest Ecosystems.
Biogeographical and Ecological Studies, pp. 99-132. Lieth,
H. and Werger. M.J. A. (eds). Elsevier, Oxford.

Prance, G.T. and Schubart. H.O.R. ( 1978). Notes on the vegeta-
tion of Amazonia I. A preliminary note on the origin of the
open white sand campinas of the lower Rio Negro. Brittonia
30: 60-63.

Projeto RADAM ( 1975). Levantamento de recursos naturals: 7.
Ministmrio das Minas e Energia, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Raven, P.H. (1987). The scope of the plant conservation prob-
lem world-wide. In: Botanic Gardens and the World
Conservation Strategy. Bramwell, D., Hamann, O.,
Heywood, V. and Synge, H. (eds). Academic Press. London,
pp. 19-29.

Unesco (I98I). Vegetation Map of South America. Natural
Resources Research Publication 17.

Vavilov, N.I. ( 1951 ). The origin, variation, immunity and breed-
ing of cultivated plants. Chronica Botanica, Waltham, Mass.

Wetterberg, G.B., Jorge Padua, M.T., Castro, C.S. and
Vasconcellos, J.M.C. de (1976). Uma andlise de prioridades
em conservao de nalureza na Amazonia.
PNUD/FAO/IBDF/BRA-45 Serie Tecnica No. 8. 62 pp.

Wetterberg. G.B., Prance, G.T. and Lovejoy, T.E. (1981).
Conservation progress in Amazonia: a structural review.
Parks ear. 5-10.

Whitmore, T.C. and Sayer, J. A. (eds) (1992). Tropical
Deforestation and Species Extinction. Chapman and Hall.
London.

WWF/IUCN (1994). Centres of Plant Diversity: A Guide and
Strategy for their Conservation. World Wide Fund for Nature
and lUCN — The World Conservation Union (3 vols).

Authors: Stephen Davis, lUCN Plant Conservation Office, and
Ghillean Prance, Royal Botanic Garden Kew, using additional
material from accounts written for the forthcoming CPD publi-
cation by Denis Adams, London, for the Carribean: the late
Alwyn Gentry, Missouri Botanical Garden, for South America:
Otto Huber, Caracas, Venezuela and Carlos Villamil,
Universidad Nacional del Sur Argentina, for South America;
Jane Villa-Lobos and Olga Herrera-MacBryde, both from the
Smithsonian Institution, for South and Central America.

4 Establishing Conservation
Priorities Using Endemic
Birds

Introduction

The Neotropics are extremely rich in species of wildlife.
Taxonomists and biogeographers. faced by the sheer scale of
this variety, are still struggling with calculations of the number
of possible species to be discovered in the region. Meanwhile.
the conservationist is left in pressing need of knowing where
this diversity is most concentrated, so that something may be
done to secure its future.

This is particularly true as rampant human population growth
exploits and exhausts the planet's natural resources at such a
speed that many species are lost even before being identified.
Wilson's (1988) call for a map of biodiversity recognized the
value of identifying the areas for conservation that would ensure
the continued survival and evolution of the highest proponion
of the world's biota. The question remains how to construct
such a map.

One key approach is to analyse and extrapolate from a major
group of animals or plants that is both taxonomically well
researched and distributionally well understood, for without
these two factors any geographic quantification becomes highly
unreliable. Birds are the most amenable group. Attempts to con-
sider richness in terms of sheer numbers in individual areas are
subject to serious biases and inconsistencies in available data.
However, allied to the concept oi endemism. richness becomes a
useful criterion.

Knowledge of centres of endemism — areas that hold assem-
blages of species found nowhere else — is critical to any con-
servation programme. On the assumption that wider-ranging
species are likely to have greater chances of survival, centres of
endemism should represent primary targets for conservation:
and the richer they are in unique species, the more significant
their claim on our attention.

BirdLife International's Biodiversity Project (ICBP. 1992;
Crosby, 1994; Stattersfield et al.. in prep.) has advanced the
analysis of centres of endemism throughout the world, and this
chapter places the results of its work in the context of forest
conservation in the American tropics. However, it is important
to emphasize that birds make many contributions to the diversity
of forests other than guiding conservationists to the hotspots.
Low density, wide-ranging species, such as raptors, may be
essential for the functioning of ecosystems, and these birds can-

not be conserved in small forest reserves that are at a great dis-
tance from each other (Thiollay, 1985). Indeed the long-term
Forest Biodynamics Project of the Smithsonian Institution and
World Wildlife Fund in the Brazilian Amazon which examines
the rales and patterns of species loss from different-sized forest
patches uses birds as the key indicators (Lovejoy et al.. 1984;
Bierregaard and Lovejoy. 1989: Bierregaard, 1990: see Chapter
26). Birds are major dispersers of seeds and pollinators of
plants, and thus play a vital role in the spatial heterogeneity and
taxonomic diversity of Neotropical forests (Stiles. 1985).
Moreover. these forests host not only thousands of resident
species, but many Nearctic migrants, whose ecological func-
tions are as important as those of the residents (Rappole, 1991 ).

Mapping Endemic Bird Areas

The BirdLife Biodiversity Project has collected data on all land-
birds which have had. in historical times, a total global breeding
range estimated to be below 50,000 sq. km ("restricted-range
species "). which is about the size of Costa Rica. The 50.000 sq.
km range size criterion is arbitrary, but produces a manageable
sample of those species which are most vulnerable to habitat
destruction and need some form of protection. The use of this
size as the threshold was influenced by the work of Terborgh
and Winter (1983), who mapped the distributions of 155
Colombian and Ecuadorian bird species with ranges below
50.000 sq. km. Terborgh and Winter used the bird distributions
to locate areas of endemism and advocated the technique as a
cost-effective method for designing protected area networks in
tropical countries.

Candidate bird lists for BirdLife's project were drawn up by
region, using the available literature. For each species, distribu-
tional information was collated from published and unpublished
sources, the latter obtained mainly from BirdLife International's
extensive network of contacts. A database of precisely geo-
referenced localities was developed, from which the distribution
of each bird could be mapped using a Geographic Information
System (see Figure 4.1 ).

The data-gathering spanned four years, and resulted in more
than 50.000 locality records (of which 87 per cent have been
assigned coordinates) for 2609 restricted-range species of the

Establishing Conservation Priorities Using Endemic Birds

Rio Grande do

rtc

.••>

1 i'

Paraiba

•
•

■■^-O — /i '

•

• '

Pernanibuco

• •

7 '^

Alagoas

38;

Figure 4.1 Distribution of the seven-coloured tanager Tangani
fasniosci in tlie Atlantic forest

world. In addition to these extant species, a total of 59 restricted-
range bird species which have become extinct since 1800 were
used in the analysis.

The initial aim was to identify areas with concentrations of
restricted-range species. Areas which support two or more
species that are entirely confined to them were considered of
primary importance, and are referred to as Endemic Bird Areas
(EBAs). The EBAs were identified by a combination of a multi-
variate statistical analysis and an investigation of the habitat and
altitudinal requirements of the bird species. Simultaneously,
patterns of endcmism in other life-forms were investigated and
shown to be closely congruent with those that emerged from the
avian analysis.

Global Patterns

More than one-quarter of all bird species have a breeding range
of 50.000 sq. km or less, and these restricted-range species are
found in 147 countries out of the world total of 235, that is in
more than 62 per cent of all countries. A total of 223 EBAs, all
with at least two restricted-range bird species confined to them,
have been identified (Long er ai. in press). Over 95 per cent of
restricted-range birds occur in these areas. The remaining 125
either do not overlap with other restricted-range species, or
overlap with only a small portion of their ranges.

The number of restricted-range species in each of the world's
EBAs ranges from just two to 67, but the majority of areas (53
per cent) support between two and 10. The number of restricted-
range species per unit area also varies considerably, with small
island EBAs often containing relatively high numbers of species

and large continental areas sometimes supporting relatively low
numbers. Most of the EBAs have a density of less than four
restricted-range species per 1000 sq. km.

Trends in tlie Americas

There are 1046 restricted-range bird species in the Americas. 40
per cent of the global total. South America, with over 700
species, has more restricted-range birds than any other conti-
nent; there are 130 in the Caribbean and 205 in Central
America. Some countries have exceptionally high numbers of
restricted-range species. For example, although Indonesia leads
with 41 I, six of the American countries (Peru, Brazil,
Colombia, Ecuador, Venezuela and Mexico) are in the top ten
countries for the world, each having over 100 restricted-range
species occurring in their territory (Figure 4.2). Other important
countries in the Americas are Costa Rica and Panama, which
when combined have 171 restricted-range species in their small
territories. There are 79 EBAs in the Americas (35 per cent of
the global total), and Brazil, Peru, Mexico, Colombia, Ecuador
and Argentina are all among the top ten countries in the world
in terms of the number of EBAs they each hold.

Forest is the most important habitat for restricted-range
birds, and in the Americas tropical hutnid forests are especially
important. Nearly two-thirds of mainland EBAs in South
America have some humid forest habitat within them, and 55
per cent are wholly characterized by this vegetation type. Each
of the EBAs in the Caribbean have some species using humid
forest and in central Mexico half of the EBAs are made up of
this habitat.

EBAs in the Caribbean

The Caribbean islands consist of two distinct groups: the
Greater Antilles and the Lesser Antilles. The avifaunas of the
Greater Antilles show greater similarities to Central and North
America than do those of the Lesser Antilles, which are more
closely related to South America. Collectively, however, the
Caribbean avifauna is quite discrete from that of the mainland

Figure 4.2 Countries with the highest numbers of restricted-
range bird species in the Americas

Argentin;!

restricted-range species
confined to the country

restricted-range species
occurrint: in the countr\

so 1(10 I. so 2(X)

no. of restricted-range species

250

Establishing Conservation Priorities Using Endemic Birds

A02

□

.A04

A03

AlO

A26l /

Figure 4.3 The Endemic Bird Areas of Central America and the Caribbean

(Lack, 1976). with just four restricted-range bird species being
shared between the islands and continental America. Nearly
every island in the Caribbean is included within, or forms, an
EBA. with a total of five in the region (Figure 4.3. Table 4.1 ).
Each of the EBAs is characterized in part by humid forest and
this is reflected by more than two-thirds of the Caribbean

restricted-range species requiring this habitat.

Notable single-island EBAs are Jamaica and Puerto Rico,
both supporting high numbers of restricted-range species (34.
261 in relation to their size (1 1.000 sq. km. 9000 sq. km). The
Eastern Caribbean EBA (A26 on Figure 4.3) incorporates 14
political units and many islands from the Virgin Islands south to

Table 4.1 Endemic Bird Areas of Middle America

Area code and name Altitude (ni)

A02 Guadalupe Island* sea level

A03 Baja California 0-1.000

A04 Sierra Madre Occidental 1,200-3.050

A05 North-west Mexican Pacific slope 0-1.000

A06 Sierra Madre Oriental 1.800-3.500

A07 North-east Mexican Gulf slope 0-1,000

A08 Central Mexican marshes 1.500-2.500

A09 Yucatan Peninsula 0-300

AlO Revillagigedo Islands 0-300

All Central Mexican highlands 900-3.500

A12 Sierra Madre del Sur 300-2.0(M

A13 Isthmus de Tehuantepec 0-1.000

A14 North Mesoamerican highlands 600-3.000

A15 North Mesoamerican Pacific slope 0-1.050

A16 Central American Caribbean slope 0-1.200

A17 Southern Central American Pacific slope 0-1.500

A 1 8 Costa Rica and Panama highlands 600-3.350

A19 Darien and Uraba lowlands 0-1,000

A20 East Panama and Darien lowlands 600-1.600

A21 Cocos Island sea level

A22 Cuba and the Bahama Islands 0-2.000

A23 Jamaica 0-2.200

A24 Hispaniola 0-3.000

A25 Puerto Rico 0-1.200

A26 Eastern Caribbean 0-1,200

A27 Balsas Drainage 0-1,500

Habitat[s]°

mixed

forest

humid and dry forest, scrub

forest

mixed

wetland

humid and dry forest, scrub

scrub, forest

humid and dry forest, scrub

scrub, dry forest

humid forest

humid and dry forest, scrub

humid forest

humid forest, dry forest, scrub

humid forest, dry forest, .scrub

humid forest, dry forest, scrub

humid forest, dry forest, .scrub

humid forest, dry forest, mixed

humid forest, dry forest, scrub

Size sq. km

r-r species

confined

occurring

280

24,000

117,000

14,000

9,500

97,000

6,600

56,900

280

57,000

7,400

7,100

102,000

28,000

43,000

22,000

28,000

41,000

1,700

93,000

11,000

76,000

9,000

6.600

64.000

" the most important habitat of the EBA is given first

r-r = restircted range.

* Guadalupe Island is an EBA because it had one restricted-range species that is now extinct, as well as its one extant restricted range species.

Establishing Conservation Priorities Using Endemic Birds

The St. Lucia Amazon Amazoiia versicolor, eiideiiiic to St.
Lucia: one of the most threatened birds in the world.

(WWF/Paul Wachtel)

Grenada. Several of the islands support their own single-island
endemics, indeed St Lucia (620 sq. km) has four species unique
to it. However, many more restricted-range species are shared
with nearby islands, thus making the whole of the Eastern
Caribbean one EBA.

Patterns of endemism for other life-forms in the Caribbean
are relatively well documented and show congruence with the
bird distributions. A general trend for reptiles and amphibians is
the occurrence of a large number of single-island or island-
group endemic species on the four Greater Antillean islands of
Cuba. Jamaica, Hispaniola and Puerto Rico. The Lesser Antilles
have relatively fewer single-island endemic species, but a large
element of the herpetofauna is endemic to the Lesser Antilles as
a whole, mirroring the Eastern Caribbean EBA. Similar patterns
were shown in the Caribbean mammal fauna in historic times
(Woods. 1989), but many of these species are now extinct. The
described patterns of endemism in insects for the Caribbean as
shown by Liebherr ( 1988) indicate congruence with the bird and
other life-forms. In the Greater Antilles there a high numbers of
single-island endemic plants, with for instance 3000 endemic
species on Cuba and 1800 species on Hispaniola (Davis et at..
1986).

EBAs In Central America

There are 26 EBAs in this region with three (Guadalupe,
Socorro and Cocos) being islands and the rest located on the
mainland (Figure 4.3, Table 4.1). Central America (including
Mexico) forms a land-bridge between North and South
America, but despite having avifaunal relationships with both
continents it shares few restricted-range species with either. The
topography of the region is complex with a series of mountain
chains passing through it. effectively separating the Pacific low-
lands from the Atlantic or Caribbean lowlands. EBAs are
situated in the lowlands on both of these slopes (such as the
Northern Central American Pacific slope - A15) and in the
higher mountainous areas (such as the Costa Rican and
Panamanian highlands - A18).

Most of the EBAs from south of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec
in southern Mexico to Panama are humid forest areas, but north
of the isthmus several are located in other vegetation types. For
instance, there are a few EBAs that consist of temperate habitat,
especially of pine-oak forest (Sierra Madre Occidental - A04
and Central Mexican highlands - All): a number occur in the
coastal plains and interior plateaus in which the habitat is typi-
cally tropical deciduous in nature (North-west Pacific slope -
A05 and Northeast Mexican Gulf slope - A07); and some
EBAs. especially the submontane and montane forests of the
region, such as the Sierra Madre del Sur (A12), show both tropi-
cal and temperate elements in the flora.

The majority of EBAs in Central America contain less than
10 restricted-range species, but a number of the humid forest
EBAs have more (e.g. A14 has 18; A27 has 14). and the Costa
Rican and Panamanian highlands EBA (A18). with 52 species,
has one of the highest number in the world although the moun-
tain range is only 30.000 sq. km in size.

Patterns of endemism for other life-forms in Central America
are overall less well documented than for birds, but valuable
comparisons between taxa can be drawn for some parts of the
region. There are striking similarities between areas of
endemism in the herpetofauna (Duellman. 1966: Savage, 1966,
1982) and the forest EBAs of southern Central America (EBAs
A09 and A13 to A 19). Studies of heliconiine and ithominiine
butterflies in southern Central America (Brown, 1987) and
recent work on the lepidopteran fauna of Costa Rica (Thomas,
1991 ) suggest similar congruence with these forest EBAs.

High levels of endemism in the flora of Central America
have been noted for Mexico (Rzedowski, 1978) and for Costa
Rica and Panama, where the level of national endemism is
expected to exceed 20 per cent of the total flora (Gentry. 1986).
The boundaries of these areas of endemism are not yet well
defined, but certain habitats such as the mesophyllous evergreen
forests (cloud forests) are noted as holding particularly high
numbers of endemic plants (Breedlove, 1981).

EBAs in Soutli America

South America has a higher diversity of birds than any other
continent, with almost 3000 landbird species: and its 52 EBAs
are more than occur in any other biogeographic region (Figure
4.4). The tropical lowland and montane humid forests hold the
greatest proportion of the continent's EBAs (Table 4.2). There
are many humid forest EBAs along both slopes of the Andes, in
the Amazon basin and in the Atlantic coastal forests.

The Andes run from north to south along the entire length of
the western part of the continent, forming a barrier to the disper-
sal of lowland and submontane animals and plants on either
side. This has led to the development of a series of EBAs run-

Table 4.2 Endemic Bird Areas of South America

Establishing Conservation Priorities Using Endemic Birds

Area code and miiiie

BOl Guianas

B02 Tepui's

B03 Cordillera de Caripe and Paria Peninsula

B04 Cordillera de la Costa Central. Venezuela

805 North and Central Venezuelan lowlands

B06 Cordillera de Merida

B07 Caribbean dry zone of Colombia and Venezuela

BOS Santa Maria Mountains

B09 Nechi lowlands

BIO East Andes of Colombia

B 1 1 Upper Rio Negro and Orinoco white sand forests

B 12 Subtropical Inter-Andean Colombia

BI3 Dry Inter-Andean valleys, Colombia

B14 Choco and Pacific slope Andes

B16 Galapagos Islands

B 1 7 North Central Andean forests

B 1 8 Eastern Andes of Ecuador and northern Peru

B19 Napo and upper Amazon lowlands

B20 Tumbesian Western Ecuador and Peru

B21 South Central Andean forests

B22 Marafion valley

B24 Sub-Andean ridgetop forests

B25 Northeast Peruvian Cordilleras

B27 The High Peruvian Andes

B28 Junin puna

B29 Eastern Andean foothills of Peru

B30 South-east Peruvian lowlands

B32 South Peruvian and north Chilean Pacific slope

B33 Upper Bolivian yungas

B34 Lower Bolivian yungas

B35 Bolivian Andes

B36 East Bolivian lowlands

B37 North Argentine Andes

B39 Argentine Cordilleras

B40 Juan Fernandez Islands

841 Central Chile

842 Tierra del Fuego and the Falklands
B43 Central Amazonian Brazil

845 Fernando de Noronha

B46 North-east Brazilian caatinga

847 Alagoan Atlantic slope

B48 Bahian deciduous forests

849 Minas Gerais deciduous forsts

850 Serra do Espina^o

852 South-east Brazilian lowland to foothills

B53 South-east Brazilian mountains

854 South-east Brazilian Araiicaria forest

B55 Entre Rios wet grasslands

856 Upper Rio Branco

857 Boliviano-Tucuman Yungas

858 Valdivian Nothofagus and Araiicaria forests
of Central Chile and Argentina

860 Central Andean paramo

Attitude (111)

Halyitat[s]°

Size scj. km

/■-/■ species
confined

/•■;■ spei
occiirn

0-1,100

humid forest

62,000

500-2,800

humid forest

56,000

700-2.500

humid forest

4,500

750-2,400

humid forest

6,800

0-1,100

savanna, mixed

65,000

750-t,000

humid forest

17,000

0-600

scrub, dry forest

53,000

750-4,600

humid forest

4,000

0-1,500

humid forest, scrub

33,000

900-5,200

humid forest, wetland

70,000

100-500

humid forest

32,000

1,200-2,500

humid forest

46,000

200-1,700

dry forest, scrub

17,000

0-1,200

humid forest

96,000

0-1,300

scrub, forest

8,000

1,500-3,500

humid forest

29,000

400-2,000

humid forest

24.000

100-600

humid forest

195,000

0-2,000

dry and humid forest, scrub

101,000

1,500-3,200

humid forest

11.000

200-2.400

forest, scrub

11,000

1,000-2,450

humid forest

2,500

1,900-3,700

humid forest

32.000

1,800-4,300

scrub, humid forest

86,000

3.700-5,000

wetland, grassland

1 1 ,000

700-1,600

humid forest

25,000

100-400

humid forest

174.000

0-3,000

scrub, mixed

79.000

1.800-3,700

humid forest

24,000

700-2,400

humid forest

35,000

1,400-4.600

scrub, humid forest

38,000

200-750

humid forest, grassland

169,000

2.000^,000

scrub, mixed

23,000

1,600-2,900

scrub, mixed

7,200

0-1,350

forest, scrub

180

0-1,600

humid forest, scrub

106,000

0-1,200

grassland, wetland

126,000

0-300

humid forest

275,000

0-60

forest, scrub

0-900

dry forest, scrub

651.000

0-1,000

humid forest

23,000

250-900

dry forest

12,000

300-500

dry forest

33,000

700-1,600

grassland, scrub

87,000

0-1,500

humid forest

216,000

500-2.200+

humid forest

25,000

0-1.000+

forest

153.000

0-200

wetland

76.000

0-100

humid forest

12,000

800-3,000

humid forest

31.000

0-3,000

humid forest

276.000

2.000-5.000

scrub, grassland

30.000

° ihc most importanl habilai of the EB A is given first,
r-r = restircled range.

Establishing Conservation Priorities Using Endemic Birds

Figure 4.4 The Endemic Bird Areas of South America

B45

B47

B48

Establishing Conservation Priorities Using Endemic Birds

Where the Amazon Basin Meets the Andes

The South-east Peruvian lowlands EBA (B3()) is a vast area
(c. 155.000 sq. km) in south-east Peru and westernmost
Brazil, primarily between 200 and 500 m in elevation,
cloaked in almost pristine lowland wet forest. The limits of
the area are poorly defined (due in part to the lack of avail-
able information on the species endemic to the area), but it
appears to be characterized by exceptionally high rainfall and
bounded by the lower-lying Amazon basin to the east and the
Andean foothills to the south-west. This EBA has a relatively
large number of species (14) confined to it (see Table).

The restricted-range bird species of the south-east
Peruvian lowlands EBA (B30)

Latin name

Pyrrlnira nipicohi
Brachygalba alhofiularis
Gulbukyrbymlms inirusianus
Malacoplila semicincla
Enbucco tucinkae
Foricarius nififrons
GraUaiia eludens
Myrnwcizci ;^f>eldi
PercnosloUt lapbotes
ConiopjiUm mciihennyi
Lopholiicciis eiilopbates
Poecilorrlccus aibi fades
Todirostnim pidcbeUuiii
Cacicus koepckeae

English name

Black-capped parakeet
White-throated jacamar
Chestnut jacamar
Semicollared puffbird
Scarlet-hooded barhet
Rufous-fronted antthrush
Elusive anipitta
Goeldi's antbird
White-lined pitta
Black-faced cotinga
Long-crested pygmy tyrant
White-cheeked tody tyrant
Black-backed tody-flycatcher
Selva cacique

Status

T
T
N

T - Threalened. as listed hy Collar el uL (1 992)

N - Ncar-lhreacened. as listed by Collar cl iil- II 99:)

Probably most importantly, however, this area has the
highest diversity of birds in any area of the world. The extra-
ordinary diversity of the avifauna (which has characteristics
of both western Amazonia and the eastern Andes) is demon-
strated by the occurrence of over 500 species of bird at
Tambopata Natural Wildlife Refuge (55 sq. km) and in a
similar sized area around Cocha Cashu Biological Station
(within the Manu National Park and Biosphere Reserve),
where 15,000 sq. km are thought to harbour over 1000 bird
species. This remarkable biodiversity extends to all other
life-forms, with 153 species of tree recorded from 1 ha of
forest at Tambopata (Parker, 1982), and more than 90 species
of mammals. 130 species of amphibians and reptiles and
1 100 species of butterflies recorded from the two reserve
areas (Terborgh cl ai. 1984; Erwin and Rios. 1986).

It appears that for various reasons, including exceptionally
high rainfall and constant renewal of nutrients from the
Andean foothills, the diversity (and endeinicity) of species is
greater along the pre-Andean headwater regions of the
Amazon than in the vast central lowlands; the diversity of
birds at least fails steadily as one travels east (Collar, 1990).
For these reasons, it is clear that for the conservation of
species diversity the highest priorities lie not in the vast cen-
tral lowlands of Amazonia, but rather in the areas around the
southwestern fringes of the basin. However, this does not
diminish the critical importance of the forested Amazon
basin, as this is clearly the source of rainfall for all of the
frinaina headwater regions of the Amazon.

ning from north to south along the Pacific lowlands to the west
of the Andes (such as the Choco and Pacific slope Andes -
B14). There are also EBAs along the central spine of the Andes
(such as North Central Andean forests of Colombia and
Ecuador - B 1 7), in some of the larger Andean intermontane val-
leys (such as the Marafion valley - B22). on mountain ranges
which run parallel to, but separate fiom, the main range (such as
the Sub-Andean ridgetop forests of Ecuador and Peru - B24)
and on isolated massifs (such as the Santa Marta Mountains -
BOS). In some parts of the Andes, for example in Peru and
Bolivia, the distribution of bird species is very complex due to
the varied topography and climatic patterns causing a mosaic of
different habitat types.

There are relatively few EBAs in the Amazon basin com-
pared to the Andes, because most Amazonian species are more
widely distributed than the 50,000 sq. km range criterion. In
addition, the distributions of many Amazonian birds are incom-
pletely known, so the boundaries and areas of the EBAs have
been only approximately defined. The high rainfall zone where
the Amazonian rain forests meet the Andean foothills has the
highest avian diversity of any region of the world (Ridgely and
Tudor, 1989); half of the Amazonian EBAs are in this region,
and there are several more in the lower parts of the adjacent
foothills (see Box 1 for more information on an EBA located in
this region).

An important concentration of five EBAs is located in the
humid tropical Atlantic coastal forests that stretch the length of
eastern Brazil (from Alagoas to Rio Grande do Sul). eastern
Paraguay and across to Misiones in north-eastern Argentina.
This region includes lowland rain forests and a variety of sub-

montane and montane forest types that are isolated from the rain
forests of the Amazon basin by a relatively arid zone Uaatinga,
cerrado and chaco). Although some species are shared with the
Amazon rain forests, there is a high level of endemism through-
out the Atlantic forests. The patterns in the distributions
of restricted-range species in this region are complex, and the
precise delineation of EBAs is made more difficult by the
extremely high levels of forest loss to which the region has been
subjected since 1500.

Congruence between EBAs and areas of endemism for other
life-forms is marked in some parts of South America, but more
studies that use constant criteria are needed for comparing dis-
tribution and areas of endemism for different groups (Thirgood
and Heath, 1994). Studies in the higher Andes are poorly docu-
mented, but the EBAs. particularly in the northern Andes, are
well matched by the distribution of the endemic herpetofauna
(Duellman, 1979). The flora of the eastern slopes of the Andes
has been identified by Myers (1988) as a global floristic "hotspof' .

Endemism occurs at a variety of different scales, especially
in plants (Gentry, 1992), so that a single EBA may represent
several areas of, for instance, floral endemism. This is the case
in the humid forests of the Darien Highlands (A20), which com-
prise several isolated peaks, each with their own endemic flora
(Gentry. 1986). However, nowhere is this factor of scale more
apparent than in the wet tropical forests of the Pacific lowlands
and foothills of western Colombia and western Ecuador. It was
in this region that Gentry (1986) reported the high lexels of
endemism on the Centinela ridgetop, an area only about I km
wide and 20 km long (and now destroyed). This small area sup-
ported 38 plant species that were known nowhere else on earth.

Establishing Conservation Priorities Using Endemic Birds

including 25 per cent (six species) ol tlie world's representatives
of one genus (Gasteraiithii.s).

Forero and Gentry (1988) estimate that the Choco depart-
ment in Colombia (which covers the main range of EBA B14)
alone holds at least 10.000 plant species, of which no fewer than
a quarter are endemic. Studies of the Chocoan fauna are limited,
but the high levels of endemism in the birds, also noted by
Terborgh and Winter ( 1983). are seemingly matched in the rep-
tiles and amphibians (Lynch. 1979) and butterflies (Brown.
1982). Similarly high levels of endemism have also been noted
in the flora of the wet and dry forests below 900 m in western
Ecuador (Dodson and Gentry. 1991 ). these forests being concor-
dant with EBAs B14 and B20 respectively.

A large proportion of biogeographical studies have concen-
trated on the lowlands of Amazonia, where patterns of endemism
have been presented for birds (Haffer, 1987). lizards of the genus
Anolis (Vanzolini and Williams, 1970). heliconiine and ithomini-
ine butterflies (Brown. 1987). and trees of the families
Bignoniaceae and Chrysobalanaceae (Prance. 1987). A work-
shop in 1990 attempted to gather leading Amazonian experts to
prioritize areas within the Amazon basin using faunal and tloral
distributions (Collar. 1990). The results have been published
recently as a map (see Chapter 26). However. Nelson et at.
(1990) have pointed out the dangers of using such approaches: in
some areas apparent species richness may well be merely a
reflection of collecting density rather than a real phenomena. No
such difficulties attend the Atlantic coastal forests of Brazil,
however, w ith high degrees of endemism of plant and animal

Figure 4.5 The distribution of Ihrcalencd humid forest bird
species in South America

Table 4.3 Habitat breakdown ol threatened and threatened
restricted-range bird species in the Americas

Habitat

Threatened Species

■ "3

:■ M

S'umhcr of spcic^
1l I 1o4

■ w,..u

1
1

Total

Humid forest

203

Dr> forest

Savanna & Gallery forest

Grassland

Wetland

Riverine

Coastal

Marine

Unknown

Restricted-range

178
46

N.B, The number of ihreaiened species in (he lolal column adds up lo more than the toial
number of threatened species in the Americas as some species have been assigned to more
than one habitat.

species (Jackson. 1978: Mori et ah. 1981: Brown. 1982;
Duellman. 1982: da Fonseca. 1985: Mittermeier. 1987).

Threats to Humid Forests as Indicated by Birds

Nearly 55% ( 1 80 species) of the threatened birds of the Americas
are confined to humid forest. Figure 4.5 shows the distribution of
these species within South America. The Atlantic coastal forests
of Brazil and eastern Paraguay immediately stand out as of criti-
cal importance, with between 15 and 24 threatened species in
some of the I degree grid cells covering the Brazilian states of
Bahia. Espirito Santo. Rio de Janeiro. Minas Gerais and Sao
Paulo. Also highlighted are the northern Andes (and adjacent
lowlands), and in particular the central East Andes, Central and
West Andes of Colombia, the northern Ecuadorian Andes, the
Pacific slope of Colombia and Ecuador (the Choco). the Andes of
southern Ecuador and northern Peru, and the central Peruvian
Andes. In comparison to all other habitat types, the humid forests
support between two and four times as many threatened species.
and their importance cannot be over-emphasized.

A large number of restricted-range species are threatened
(761, e.g. 29 per cent of all such birds) and these species total
77 per cent of all the world's threatened birds. In the Americas.
79 per cent (259 species) of the region's 328 threatened species,
as listed by Collar et al. ( 1992). also have restricted ranges. The
major cause of threat to restricted-range birds is habitat destruc-
tion, affecting 78 per cent of all birds at risk in the Americas.
This figure has particular relevance to the humid forests of the
region. As Table 4.3 shows, the principal habitat of threatened
species and those that are of restricted range is humid forest. If
deforestation continues at the present high rate it is likely that
many more species, especially those with restricted ranges, will
become globally threatened.

EBAs vary in the percentage of their restricted-range birds
which are threatened. In the Americas, most EBAs (72 per cent)
have one or more threatened restricted-range species, but some
have much higher proportions of threatened species, clearly
marking them as priorities for conser\ation action (see Box 2).
A preliminary e\aluation of the world's EBAs has been made
on the basis of biological importance and threat (ICBP. 1992).
Biological importance was based on richness in restricted-range
species in relation to what would be expected for the area of
each EBA. Modifications were allowed for taxonomic unique-
ness of the species involved and the importance for other tloral

Establishing Conservation Priorities Using Endemic Birds

Some Threatened EBAs

Some EBAs are more threatened than others and need con-
servation measures now if extinctions are to be averted. The
Paria Peninsula and the Cordillera de Caripe EBA (B03) and
the Alagoan Atlantic slope forest EBA (B47) illustrate how
some EBAs contain significant numbers of restricted-range
species that are also threatened, largely through habitat
destruction.

EBA B03 is a highly threatened area of endemism in
northern Venezuela. It covers only 4000 sq. km or there-
abouts, consisting of two disjunct mountain ranges: the low-
lying and coastal mountains (highest peaks 1300 m) of the
Paria Peninsula, and the Cordillera de Caripe (highest peaks
2,600 m) located further inland to the south-west.

The EBA is rich in restricted-range species, with 13
occurring including five endemics (see Table). All of the
species are found in the humid forests of these mountains.
The five endemic species are listed as threatened and are cur-
rently known from only a handful of localities within the two
mountain ranges. Indeed, Hylonyinpha macrocerca and
Myioborus pariae are restricted to the Paria Peninsula moun-
tains and Basileiiteiiis griseiceps is confined to the Cordillera
de Caripe. A sixth restricted-range species, CampylDpterus
eiisipennis. is also considered threatened, but extends onto
the island of Tobago.

The restricted-range bird species of the Paria Peninsular
and Cordillera de Caripe (B03)

Species

NannopsttJaca panychlora
CainpyloiJierus ensipeniiis
Chlontstdhoti alice
Hylonympha imicrocerca
Phunmuichriisfiilgidus
Atitacorhynchtis stitccitiis
Premnoptex lutci
Syndactyla giillulata
Pipreola fonnosa
Diglossa venez.ia'lensi\
Thlypopsis fulviceps

BasiU'iitenis griseiceps
Myii>bi>rtis parkw

English name Status Other EBAs

Tepui Pan-otiel B02

While-tailed Sabrewing T

Green-tailed Emerald B()4

Scissor-tailed Hummingbird T
White-tipped Quetzal
Groove-billed Toucanet
White-throated Barbtail T

Guttulated Foliage-gleaner
Handsome Fruileater
Venezuelan Flowerpiercer T

Fulvous-headed Tanager

Grey-headed Warbler T

Yellow-faced Redstart T

B04. 808
B04

804
804

804. B06.
810

T - Thrcalened. as listed by Collar et uL ( 1992).

N - Near-ttircalened. as listed by Collar (7 al. ( 1992).

The area is a priority site for con.servation action because
of extensive forest clearance (Wege and Long, 1994).
Conservation is needed at more than one site in the EBA as
there is no single locality that holds all the threatened
species. Particularly important sites are Cerro Humo in the

central Paria Peninsula and Cerro Negro in the Cordillera de
Caripe (Long. 1993). Both are located in protected areas.
Cerro Humo in the Paria Peninsula National Park and Cerro
Negro in the EI Guacharo National Park, but habitat destruc-
tion in the area is still proceeding at an alarming rate.

The Atlantic coastal forests of Brazil hold as many as 17
per cent of the threatened bird species of the Americas. The
region has suffered extensive deforestation, having been one
of the first parts of South America to be colonized by
Europeans. It is estimated that only 2-5 per cent of the origi-
nal forest cover remains in the region (Oliver and Santos.
1991).

The northernmost stands of the Atlantic coastal forest in
Alagoas state, form a particularly important EBA (B47). In
the lowland humid forests and hill forests of this narrow
coastal slope there exist a concentration of threatened
restricted-range species, several of which are on the verge of
extinction. The area holds 14 restricted-range species (see
Table), of which nine are confined to this part of the Atlantic
coastal forests and 12 are listed as threatened (Collar et al.,
1992). The Alagoas curasow Mini mint is thought to be
extinct in the wild as a result of hunting and clearance of the
few patches of lowland forest that still existed in the 1970s.
Two of the threatened species (Philydor novaesi and
Mynnotherula snowi) are now known from only 1 5 sq. km of
hill forest at Murici. This forest is important for another I 1
threatened species including nine of the restricted-range birds
and additionally Ccirpomis melanocephaliis and Cardiiellis
yanellii.

The restricted-range bird species of the Alagoan Atlantic
coastal forests EBA (B47)

Latin name

Mill! inifu

Amazona rtiojocotylha
Touit sttrda
Picttmntis ftdvescen.t
Phdydnr novctesi
SynalUtxis infitscata
Hylcipeztts t>chroleucu\
Mynneciza ruflcattda
Myrmnthenila siumi
Terenttra sicki
lodoplcura pipra
Xipholena atropurpiirea
Hemitriciiis mirandae
Phylloscarlci ceciliae
Tungara fasntDsa
Cunieitsfnrhesi

T - Threatened, as listed by Collar el ,iL 1 1 992).

N - Near-threatened, as listed by Collar el al. ( 1992).

English name

Status

Other EBAs

Alagoas Curassow

Red-browed Parrot

B5I.B52

Golden-tailed Parrotlet

B5I.B52

Tawny Piculet

Alagoas foliage-gleaner

Pinto's Spinetail

White-browed Antpilla

Scalloped Antbird

B5I

Alagoas Anturen

852

Orange-bellied Antwren

Buff-throated Purpletuft

B52

While-winged Cotinga

B5I

Buff-breasled Tody-tyrant

Alagoas T> rannulet

Seven-coloured Tanager

Forbes' Blackbird

and faunal groups where this was known. Threat was evaluated
on the proportions of restricted-range species which are consid-
ered threatened by Collar and Andrew (1988) and Collar et al.
( 1992) and on the proportion of land cover which has no pro-
tected status. The EBAs were categorized into those of critical,
urgent and high importance for conservation action.

Within the Americas, 22 of the 81 EBAs fell into the highest

category (critically important). Of these, 17 are composed, at
least in part, of humid tropical forests. There were only two
EBAs classified under this category in Central America, the
South Central American slope (.'\I7) being the only humid for-
est area. In the Caribbean four of the five EBAs (Cuba and the
Bahamas - A22. Hispaniola - A24. Puerto Rico - A25. and the
Eastern Caribbean - A26) were ranked as critically important.

Establishing Conservation Priorities Using Endemic Birds

The T;ingar;i t'astuosa, seven-coloured tanai>cr. is i/ircniciiecl and restricted to the Atlantic coastal forest ol north-east Brazil.

(Painting by Peter Hayman and reproduced with permission of the Rare Bird Clubl

In South America, 10 of the 15 EBAs that ranked as critically
important are humid forest areas (Table 4.4).

Conclusions

Identifying key sites is crucially important for the conservation
of biological diversity, and it is clear that a very high proportion
of such areas in the tropical Americas are forested. Information
relating to other elements (such as wide-ranging, low-density
raptors, pollinators and seed dispersers. and migratory birds)
and to the distribution and ecology of other life-forms must
clearly continue to refine and extend the number and type of
forest areas to be targeted. Although. BirdLife International is in
the process of making further additions and adjustments
(Stattersfield et al.. in prep.; Wege and Long, 1995), its
Biodiversity Project and associated analysis of threatened
species have laid the foundation for work to begin in the field
on improving the conservation status of many key areas.

Table 4.4 Humid forest EBAs

in South America that are ranked as

of critical importance globally

Endemic Bird Area

EBA code

Humid forest type

Cordillera de Caripe & Paria

B()3

lowland/montane

Peninsula

Choco

BI4

lowland

Western Andes of Colombia and

Bl.^

lowland/montane

Ecuador

East Peruvian Cordilleras

B25

montane

South-east Peruvian lowlands

B30

lowland

Lower Bolivian yungas

B34

lowland

Alagoan Atlantic slope

B47

lowland

Bahian & Espirilo Santo Atlantic

B3I

lowland

slope

South-east Brazilian lowland to

B52

lowland

foothills

South-east Brazilian montauis

B5.^

montane

References

Bierregaard, R.O. (1990). Avian communities in the under-
storey of Amazonian forest fragments. In: Biogeograp/iy and
Ecology of Forest Bird Communities. Pp. 333-343. Keast, A.
(ed.). SPB Academic Publishing. The Hague.

Bierregaard, R.O, and Lovejoy, T.E. (1989). Effects of forest
fragmentation on Amazonian understorey bird communities.
Acta Aniazonica 19; 215-241.

Breedlove, D.E. (1981). Introduction to the Flora of Chiapas.
Part 1 . California Academy of Sciences, San Franci.sco, U.S.A.

Brown, K.S. Jr. (1982). Paleoecology and regional patterns of
evolution in neotropical forest butterflies. In; Biological
Diversification in the Tropics. Pp. 255-308. Prance. G.T.
(ed.). Columbia University Press, New York.

Brown, K.S. Jr. (1987). Biogeography and evolution of neotrop-
ical butterflies. In: Biogeography and Quaternary History in
Tropical America. Pp. 66-104. Whitmore, T.C. and Prance.
G.T. (eds). Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Collar, N.J. and Andrew, P. (1988). Birds to Watch: the ICBP

Establishing Conservation Priorities Using Endemic Birds

World Checklist of Threatened Birds. International Council
for Bird Preservation Technical Publication 8. ICBP.
Cambridge, U.K.

Collar N.J. (1990). The Amazon as Ark. World Birduatch:
12(1-2): 10-12.

Collar. N.J., Gonzaga, L. P.. Krabbe. N.. Madrono Nieto. A .
Naranjo. L. G.. Parker, T. A. and Wege, D. C. (1992).
Threatened Birds of the Americas: the ICBP Red Data Book.
Third edition (part 2). International Council for Bird
Preservation, Cambridge. U.K.

Crosby, M.J. (1994). Mapping the distributions of restricted-
range birds to identify global conservation priorities. In:
Mapping the Diversity of Nature. Pp. 145-154. Miller R.l.
(ed.). Chapman and Hall. London.

Davis, S.D.. Droop, S.J.M., Gregerson, P., Henson, L.. Leon,
C.J., Villa-Lobos, J.L.. Synge. H. and Zantovska. J. (1986).
Plants in Danger: What do we know? International Union for
Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources. Gland.
Switzerland and Cambridge. U.K.

Dodson. C.H. and Gentry. A.H. (1991). Biological extinction in
western Ecuador. Annals Missouri Botanical Garden 78:
273-295.

Duellman. W.E. ( 1966). The Central American herpetofauna: an
ecological perspective. Copeia 1966: 700-719.

Duellman. W.E. (1979). The herpetofauna of the Andes: pat-
terns of distribution, origin, differentiation and present com-
munities. In: The South America)} Herpetofauna: its origin,
evolution, and dispersed. Pp. 371-459. Duellman. W.E. (ed.).
University of Kansas Museum of Natural History
(Monograph 7).

Duellman. W.E. (1982). Quaternary climatic-ecological fluctua-
tions in the lowland tropics: frogs and forests. In: Biological
Diversification in the Tropics. Pp. 389-402. Prance. G.T.
(ed.). Columbia University Press, New York.

da Fonseca. G.A.B. (1985). Observations on the ecology of the
muriqui (Brachyteles arachnoides E. Geoffroy 1806): impli-
cations for its conservation. Primate Conservation 5: 48-52.

Erwin. T.L. and Rios. D.V. (1986). Zona Reservada de
Tainhopata: a plan for strengthening science, conservation
and community utilization of bioresources in the Tambopata
region. Smithsonian Institution, unpublished report.

Forero, E. and Gentry, A.H. (1988). Neotropical plant distribu-
tion patterns with emphasis on north-western South America:
a preliminary overview. In: Proceedings of a Workshop on
Neotropical Distribution Patterns. Pp. 21-37. Vanzolini.
P.E. and Heyer. W.R. (eds). Academia Brasileira de
Ciencias. Rio de Janiero. Brazil.

Gentry. A.H. (1986). Endemism in tropical vs. temperate
plant communities. In: Conservation Biology. Pp. 153-181.
Soule, M.E. (ed.). Sinauer Press, Sunderland.
Massachusettes. U.S.A.

Gentry. A.H. (1992). Tropical forest biodiversity: distributional
patterns and their conservational significance. Oikos 63( 1 ):
19-28.

Haffer. J. (1987). Biogeography of neotropical birds. In:
Biogeography and Quaternaiy Histoiy in Tropical America.
Pp. 105-150. Whitmore. T.C. and Prance. G.T. (eds).
Clarendon Press. Oxford.

ICBP (1992). Putting Biodiversity on the Map: priority areas
for global conservation. International Council for Bird
Preservation. Cambridge. U.K.

Jackson. J.F. (1978). Differentiation in the genera Enyalius and
Strobilurus (Iguanidae): implications for Pleistocene climatic

The Jorcsts oj Itatiaia Natioiud Park hold a wide selection of the
restricted-range species of the montane forests of south-east
Brazil (Joe Tobias)

changes in eastern Brazil. Arquivos de Zoologia do Estado de
Sao Paulo.

Lack. D. ( 1976). Island Biology Illustrated by the Land Birds of
Jamaica. Blackwell. London.

Liebherr. J.K. (1988). Biogeographic patterns of West Indian
Platynus carabid beetles (Coleoptera). In: Zoogeography of
Caribbean Insects. Pp. 121-152. Liebherr. J.K. (ed.). Cornell
University Press. Ithaca. New York.

Long. A.J. (1993). Restricted-range and threatened bird species
in tropical montane cloud forest. In: Tropical Montane Cloud
Forests: Proceedings of an International Symposium.
Hamilton. L.S.. Juvik. J.O. and Scatena. F.N. (eds). East-
West Center. Honolulu. Hawaii. USA.

Long. A.J.. Crosby, M.C., Stattersfield, A.J. and Wege, D.C. (in
press). Towards a global map of biodiversity: patterns in the
distribution of restricted range birds. Biogeography.

Lovejoy. T.E. Rankin. J.M.. Bierregaard. R.O.. Brown. K.S.,
Emmons. L.H. and Van der Voort. M.E. (1984). Ecosystem
decay of Amazon forest remnants. In: E.xtinctions. Pp.
295-326. Nitecki. M.H. (ed.). University of Chicago Press.
Chicago. U.S.A.

Lynch. J.D. (1979). The amphibians of the lowland tropical
forests. In: The South American Herpetofauna: its origin,
evolution and dispersal. Duellman, W.E. (ed.). University of
Kansas Museum of Natural History. Monograph 7. Pp.
189-215.

Mittermeier. R.A. (1987). Framework for primate conservation
in the Neotropical region. In: Primate Consen'ation in the
Tropical Rainforest. Pp. 305-320. Marsh. C. and
Mittermeier. R.A. (eds). Alan R. Liss, New York.

Mori. S.A.. Boom. B.M. and Prance. G.T. (1981). Distribution
patterns and conservation of eastern Brazilian coastal forest
tree species. Brittonia 33(2): 233-245.

Myers. N. (1988). Threatened biotas: '"hotspots"" in tropical
forests. Environmentalist S: 187-208.

Nelson. B.W.. Ferreira. C.A.C., da Silva, M.F. and Kawasak.
M.L. (1990). Endemism centres, refugia and botanical collec-
tion density in Brazilian Amazonia. Nature 345: 714—716.

Oliver. W.L.R. and Santos. LB. (1991). Threatened Endemic
Mammals of the Atlantic Forest Region of South-east
Brazil. Jersey Wildlife Preservation Trust. Special
Scientific Report 4.

Parker, T.A. (1982). Observations of some unusual rainforest

Establishing Conservation Priorities Using Endemic Birds

and marsh birds in southeastern Peru. Wilum liiillclin 94:

477-493.
Prance, G.T. (1987). Biogeography of neotropical plants. In:

Biogeography and Quateniaiy History in Tropical America.

Pp. 46-65. Whitmore. T.C. and Prance, G.T. (ed.s).

Clarendon Press. Oxford.
Ridgely, R.S. and Tudor, G. (1989). The Birds of South

America: the oscine passerines. Vol I . Oxford University

Press, Oxford and Tokyo.
Rappole, J.H. (1991). Migrant birds in Neotropical forest: a

review from a conservation perspective. In: Conserving

Migratory Birds. Pp. 259-277. Salathe, T. (ed.) International

Council for Bird Preservation Technical Publication 12.

ICBP, Cambridge, U.K.
Rzedowski J. (1978). Vegetacidn de Me.xico. Editorial Limusa.

Mexico D. F.
Savage, J.M. (1966). The origins and hisliiry of the Central

American herpetofauna. Copeia 1966: 719-766.
Savage, J.M. ( 1982). The enigma of the Central American her-
petofauna: dispersal or vicariance? Annals Missouri

Botanical Garden 69: 464-547.
Stattersfield, A. J., Crosby. M.J., Long. A. J.. Wege. D.C. and

Heath, M.F. (in prep.). Global Directory of Endemic Bird

Areas (EBAs). BirdLife International, Cambridge, U.K.
Stiles, F.G. (1985). On the role of birds in the dynamics of

Neotropical forests. In: Conservation of Tropical Forest

Birds. Pp.49-59. Diamond, A.W. and Lovejoy, T.E. (eds).

International Council for Bird Preservation Technical

Publication 4. ICBP. Cambridge, U.K.
Terborgh, J. and Winter, B. (1983). A method for siting parks

and reserves with special reference to Colombia and

Ecuador. Biological Conservation 27: 45-58.
Terborg, J.W., Fitzpatrick, J.W. and Emmons, L. (1984).

Annotated checklist of the bird and mammal species of

Cocha Cashu Biological Station, Manu National Park, Peru.

Fieldiana Zoology 21:1 -29.

Thomas, CD. ( 1991 ). Habitat use and geographic ranges of but-
terflies from the wet lowlands of Costa Rica. Biological
Conservation 55: 269-281.

Thiollay, J.-M. (1985). Falconiforms of tropical rainforests: a
review. In: Conservation Studies on Raptors. Pp. 155-165.
Newton, I. and Chancellor, R.D. (eds). International Council
for Bird Preservation Technical Publication 5. ICBP.
Cambridge. U.K.

Thirgood. S.J. and Heath. M.F. (1994). Global patterns of
endemism and the conservation of biodiversity. In:
Systemalics and Conservation Evaluation. Forey. P.L..
Humphries. C.J. and Vane-Wright. R.l. (eds). Systematics
Association Special Volume No. 50. pp. 207-227. Clarendon
Press. Oxford.

Vanzolini. P.E. and Williams. E.E. (1970). South American
anoles: geographic differentiation and evolution of the Anolis
chnsolepis species group. Arquivos de Zoologia do Estado
de Sao Paulo 19: 1-298.

Wege D.C. and Long A.J. (1995). Key areas for threatened
birds in the Neotropics. BirdLife International (Conservation
Series), Cambridge, U.K.

Wilson, E.O. (1988). International conservation: the ultimate
goal. Orion 7(3): 16-21.

Woods. C. A. ( 1989). The biogeography of West Indian rodents.
In: Biogeography of the West Indies. Pp. 741-798. Woods.
C.A. (ed.). Sandhill Crane Press. Gainseville.

Author: Adrian Long, BirdLife International, with contributions
from Nigel Collar. David Wege. Mike Crosby and Alison
Stattersfield of BirdLife International and Mariano Gimenez-
Dixon. IUCN. Gland. Switzerland. (BirdLife International is the
new name for ICBP, the International Council for Bird
Preservation.

5 Forest Wildlife and Its
Exploitation by Humans

Introduction

In this chapter the vast wealth of vertebrates — amphibians,
reptiles, fish, birds and mammals — in Neotropical forests is
documented and the ways in which these fauna have been
affected by human activities are discussed. Attention focuses on
the birds and mammals which are the best studied of the groups.
In conclusion, the importance of distinguishing between the for-
est and the fauna when discussing the conservation of tropical
biota is noted.

Patterns of Diversity

Amphibians and Reptiles

There are over I (X)0 species of amphibians recorded from .South
America and 1 100 species of reptiles. The larger species include
36 species of turtles and seven species of crocodilians
(Duellman. 1979). Approximately 500 reptile species are found
in the Neotropical lowland rain forest area; of these about 300
are endemic to that area (Dixon, 1979).

Within Neotropical countries, Colombia has the greatest num-
ber of amphibians (585 species — but see note on Table 5.1) and
Mexico the greatest number of reptiles (717 species) (Table 5.1 ).

The average number of amphibian and reptile species per
site, from five Neotropical forest sites, was 143 (range 131-185.
see Table 5.2). These local faunas consisted, on average, of two
caecilians. two salamanders and 59 anurans for a total of 63
species of amphibians, and four turtles, two crocodilians, 24
lizards, one amphisbaenian and 49 snakes for a total of 80
species of reptiles (Duellman, 1991). Most herpetofaunal
assemblages in the Neotropical forests consist of about half
diurnal and half nocturnal species; about half of the species are
terrestrial and half arboreal (Duellman, 1991 ).

Fish

The Neotropics have the richest freshwater fish fauna in the
world with more than 2400 species already described. Within
this region, the Amazon basin has more than 1300 species, mak-
ing it the richest river basin in the world for fresh water fish
(Lowe-McConnell. 1987). Goulding et al. (1988) report a total
of at least 450 fish species from the blackwaters of the Rio
Negro, making this the most diverse tributary river in the world.
They further report that communities of fish at single collecting
locations are the richest yet recorded for freshwater lakes, rivers
or streams anywhere in the world — with over 100 species col-
lected from a 4-8 x 30 m rocky pool from the upper Rio Negro.

Many Amazonian fish species are used by humans. In the
Brazilian Amazonian town of Itacoatiara a total of at least 86

species in 56 genera and 18 families are known to be consumed
(Smith. 1981a). In the markets of Manaus. 64 fish species were
recorded, though only a few species account for the majority of
the catch (Lowe-McConnell, 1987).

Birds

The Neotropics are also extremely rich in forest birds — of the
3300 Neotropical avian species. 1300 are forest species. This
compares with 800 forest bird species for Southeast Asia and
400 for Africa (Karr. 1989). The explanations for the high
diversity of Neotropical forest avifauna vary depending on the
geographical scale considered. Climatic conditions, geographic
position, extent of forest area and differences in habitat types all
influence diversity at the broadest scale. At a regional scale, the
extent of forest cover and the history of forest distribution affect
patterns of diversity (Karr. 1989).

The avifauna of the Neotropics is characterized by having
numerous families, most with a relatively small number of
species (Diamond. 1985). Moreover, as compared to the Old
World tropics. Latin American forests are extraordinarily rich in
raptors and woodpeckers (Picidae) (Karr. 1989). They also have
an exceptionally diverse radiation of parrots (Psittacidae) and
trogons (Trogonidae). Amongst the passerines, the suboscines
dominate in the Neotropics. They include two major groups in
South America: tyrant-flycatchers (Tyrannidae), cotingas
(Cotingidae) and manakins (Pipridae) in one group and
wood-creepers (Dendrocolaptidae). ovenbirds (Furnariidae).
antbirds (Formicariidae) and tapaculos (Rhinocryptidae) in the
other. The suboscines may be classified as a New World group
as only three small families occur in the Old World tropics: the
broadbills — Eurylaimidae, pittas — Pittidae and false sunbirds
— Philepittidae (Stiles, 1983).

New World forests hold .several endemic groups, including:
tinamous (Tinamidae). trumpeters (Psophiidae). puftTsirds
(Bucconidae). motmots (Momotidae). jacamars (Galbulidae),
oilbirds (Steatornithidae). potoos (Nyctibiidae) and ovenbirds
(Karr. 1989; Stiles. 1983; Keast. 1985). In the Neotropics. as in
the other tropical regions, only four to 12 per cent of bird
species are temperate-tropical migrants (Karr, 1989).

Avian diversity at any given site depends on the extent of the
forest cover, local habitat heterogeneity, the history of forest
distribution and the nature of human activities. As a result, the
distribution of bird species is patchy. This patchiness is of great
concern to conservationists. It has given rise to an extensi\e lit-
erature on centres of endemism (see Chapter 4) and sites of high

Forest Wildlife and Its Exploitation by Hlimans

The ten countries within this Atlas with the highest numbers of mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians.

Table 5.1

The ten C(

Mammals

Mexico

449

Brazil

428

Peru

359

Colombia

359

Ecuador

324

Venezuela

323

Bolivia

316

Costa Rica

228

Panama

218

Guyana

193

Birds

Colombia

1.721

Peru

1.701

Brazil

1.622

Ecuador

1.500

Venezuela

1.325

Bolivia

1.274

Mexico

961

Panama

929

Costa Rica

850

Paraguay

650

Reptiles

Mexico

717

Colombia

590

Brazil

467

Ecuador

379

Peru

298

Venezuela

246

Guatemala

231

Panama

226

Costa Rica

215

Bolivia

208

Amphibians

Colombia*

585

Brazil

516

Ecuador

402

Mexico

284

Peru

241

Venezuela

183

Panama

164

Costa Rica

160

Bolivia

112

Surinam

* This cslimale, see Chapter 26 for source, is consideratiiy higher Ihan thai suggested by other sources.
S<nmi-\: As in the relcvanl chapters within this Atlas or WCMC ( |i»2l

species richness. The theoretical explanation for these centres is
much debated, but their existence is not generally disputed.
However, the work of Nelson er at. ( 1990) has drawn attention
to the influence of collecting intensity on apparent distribution
of species diversity.

The highest bird diversity so far recorded occurs in the
forests of the western Amazon. At one site in Manu National
Park, Peru. Terborgh and colleagues identified over 550
species of birds (Karr et al.. 1990; Terborgh et al.. 1990:
Table 5.2). As one ascends the mountains from the
Amazonian lowlands, species richness declines, although
some authors suggest that there is a peak in avian species
richness in the wettest cloud forests lying between 600 and
1400 meters (Terborgh in Stiles, 1985). Avian diversity is
highest in Colombia with 1721 species, followed closely by
Peru with 1701 (Table 5.1).

The avifauna of Central America is less rich than that in
South America, but is still well above the levels of diversity for
tropical forests of other continents.

Mammals

Mexico, Central America and South America have about 1116
species of mammals in 294 genera and 1 1 orders (not including
Cetacea) (Baker. 1991). Within this region, as elsewhere in the
world, tropical rain forests are the richest ecosystems for mam-
mals — a typical lowland rain forest can contain over 120

Table 5.2 Vertebrate diversity at selected sites in the Neotropics

Amphibians

44*

Reptiles

89*

Birds

410

444

351

554

Mammals (non-

■flying!

51*

Mammals (bats

)

Sites; I - Santa Cecilia, ea-stem Ecuador

2 - La Selva Biological Station. Costa Rica

3 - Barro Colarado Island and adjacent mainland. Panama

4 - Manaus. Brazil or (*) the study area for the Minimum Critical Size of Ecosystems

Project 80 km north of Manaus

5 - Cocha Cashu Held station in Manu National Park. Peru

Source: Gentry t lyWl

species of mammals. However, bird species diversity always
greatly exceeds that of mainmals, sometimes by up to a factor of
five (Bourliere, 1989).

The numbers of families, genera and species of mammals
inhabiting Africa and the Neotropical region are very similar.
For instance, rodents and primates are equally diverse in tropi-
cal Africa and tropical America. Ungulates are. however, con-
siderably more diverse in Africa (Bourliere, 1973). The
Neotropics are, nevertheless, slightly richer. This is due. in par-
ticular, to the higher diversity of bats found there. In some areas
of the Neotropics, the number of bat species may equal or. in
some cases, even exceed that of all other mammal species com-
bined. Bats are, however, very sensitive to changes in tempera-
ture and humidity; at altitudes above 1000 m the number of
species can decline by half (Eisenberg, 1990).

Costa Rica has 228 known mammal species (Table 5.1) with
1 13 species recorded from La Selva rain forest (Wilson, 1990).
While in South America. Peru has 361 known mammalian
species (Table 5.1) with single rain forest locations possessing
about 122 species (Patton et al., 1982). This well documented
increase in mammal species richness is mainly attributable to a
rise in the number of bat species as the equator is approached
(WilligandSandlin. 1991).

The Neotropical mammal fauna can be divided into three
major components according to their evolutionary origin and
their time of arrival in the region. The original fauna consisted
of the Marsupialia and Xenarthra. The early invaders of South
America are the New World Primates, caviomorph rodents
(guinea pigs Cavia spp., capybaras Hydrochaeris hydrochaeris
and their allies) and Procyonid carnivores (racoons and their
allies); while the more recent invaders are Perissodactyla,
Artiodactyla, non-caviomorph rodents and non-procyonid carni-
vores. Members of all three groups, found in ten orders (with
Sirenia excluded), now occur together in the forested habitats of
the Neotropics (Eisenberg, 1989).

Emmons (1990) recognises four main biogeographical
regions for Neotropical rain forest mammals: 1 ) Central
America and the Pacific forests of Colombia. Ecuador and
northern Peru; 2) the Amazon Basin: 3) the Brazilian Atlantic
coastal rain forests; and 4) the Caribbean coastal rain forests
of Colombia and Venezuela. The most species rich of these is
the Amazon, though it has few endemics. In contrast, the
Atlantic coastal rain forests, with a mammal fauna very dif-
ferent from the Amazon, have many endemic species and
genera of mammals.

Forest Wildlife and Its Exploitation by Humans

Manu Biosphere Reserve:
Conservation

Manu National Park, in Southeastern Peru, with an area of
15.328 sq. km. is the largest national park in Western
Amazonia and one of the largest in the world. Starting in the
Andean highlands, the park protects the whole basin of the
Manu River. The park was created in 1973. In 1976. it and
the adjacent lowlands outside its eastern boundary were
declared a Biosphere Reserve. The eastern lowlands area is
inhabited by Indians and colonists in constant contact with
the national society. The Park itself is inhabited by at least
three native ethnic groups, of which the Matsigenka is the
most numerous, numbering several hundred persons spread
along the middle and upper Manu River (Vasquez and
Barrena, 1990).

In order to assess the impact of indigenous subsistence
hunting on Manu's wildlife, a group of ecologists (funded by
Wildlife Conservation International and the Jessie Smith
Noyes Foundation) made counts of game animals along hunt-
ing trails in the forest surrounding two Indian villages during
1989 and 1990. The first village, Yomuibato, located on the
Andean foothills, is the largest Matsigenka settlement inside
Manu National Park (one hundred people). All hunting in
Yomuibato is for subsistence and is with bow and arrow.
Diamante, the second village, just outside the Biosphere
Reserve, is a Piro Indian community of about two hundred
individuals. Diamante is as old as Yomuibato (about ten
years), but established in an area with greater outside contact.
Diamante hunters prefer to use shotguns, and their hunting is
mainly for subsistence. Villagers in both communities also
fish, gather and practice slash-and-burn shifting cultivation
(Alvard and Kaplan, in press).

A comparison between these hunted sites and ecologically
similar unhunted forest suggests a 70-90 per cent reduction
in the densities of large primates and a 50-80 per cent
decrease in cracid (guans and curassows) densities in the for-

A Case Study of Subsistence Hunters and Wildlife

est around the villages. However, in Yomuibato, the more
traditional settlement, spider monkeys Ateles paniscus,
razor-billed curassows Mitii tuberosa and white-winged
trumpeters Psophia leucoptera, all species vulnerable to
hunting, can be found within one kilometre of the village. In
contrast, they had completely disappeared within a 3 km
radius of Diamante and were severely reduced within 8 km.
about the average distance of a one-day hunting trip
(Mitchell and Raez-Luna, 1990).

The administration policy of Manu Park was based on the
assumption that as long as the Indian populations kept their
traditional, subsistence, low-technology lifestyle, they would
not represent a threat to the park's wildlife. In order to
accomplish this, all trade of forest items and the use of
firearms were banned, contact between natives and outsiders
was kept to a minimum and visits outside the park by Indians
were discouraged.

From the point of view of pure wildlife conservation,
these policies have yielded results — at least in the
short-term. The forest surrounding Yomuibato supports a
diminished, but apparently healthy, bird and mammal fauna,
in striking contrast to forest near Diamante and even smaller
communities outside the park. On the other hand, the isola-
tion policy has resulted in severe conflict between the Indians
and the Park administration. Greater economic independence,
and participation in the park's administrative decisions are
being actively lobbied for by the Indians.

While the right to self-determination on the part of the
indigenous peoples of Manu is unquestionable, the severe
effects of human cultural, technological and demographic
change on the conservation of the forest wildlife is equally
clear (see also Bodmer et ah, 1994). What is necessary now
are: I ) policies which involve participation by local peoples;
and 2) research on alternatives to game as a source of protein.

Exploitation of Neotropical Forest Vertebrates by Humans

Humans have exploited the tremendous diversity of terrestrial
vertebrates in Neotropical forests ever since they arrived on the
continent. This exploitation has been both indirect and direct
(Redford. 1992).

Habitat destruction has been a major indirect cause of faunal
loss. A less-often considered process involves the destruction of
critical habitat outside that being considered, therefore extirpat-
ing a species from what would seem to be ideal habitat —
examples of this include beach nesting turtles which can be
eliminated from an entire watershed if a nesting beach is
destroyed, or white-lipped peccary Tayassii pecari which appear
to move through very large areas and appear to be eliminated
from a piece of forest by the construction of an agricultural
colony that blocks a traditional peccary transit path.

People have indirectly effected the fauna in many other
ways. One of the most important is probably the effect of
forest-extraction activities by humans. For example, logging can
remove fruit-bearing trees and destroy nesting and other habi-
tats. Extraction by humans, of either forest fruits or minor forest
products, may result in changes in the availability of resources
to the vertebrate forest fauna. .Subsistence or commercial hunt-
ing and fishing may remove potential prey from tropical forests.

thereby affecting predators, scavengers, and the animals that
depend on them (Thiollay. 1984). For example. Emmons ( 1987)
has pointed out that every major prey species of the jaguar
Panthera onca is intensively hunted by humans.

""Modern" human activities also have major impacts on the
fauna. These include the effects of mercury and sediment
contamination on fish, the effects of smoke on plants and ani-
mals, including pollinators, the effect of gold mining on beach
and riparian forests and the increase of edge habitat and its
effects within the forest.

These indirect effects of human activity on the Neotropical
fauna have largely arisen during recent decades. In contrast, the
direct exploitation of animals, has a very long history in Neo-
tropical forests. Animals have been and continue to be hunted
for a multitude of purposes: they are killed for food, for skins,
leather and other non-edible products: live animals are collected
for pets, zoos and the biomedical trade; they are exploited for
sport hunting or tourism: and they are used as a source of
domesticated animals (Redford and Robinson, 1991). In this
account we will focus on the first two of these categories, which
are by far the most significant.

Hunting of animals for food has been going on as long as
humans have occupied Neotropical forests. This hunting has

Forest Wildlife and Its Exploitation by Humans

The Military and Forest Wildlife Conservation — The Case of Ecuador

The traditional strategy of relying entirely on a state agency
to protect forests within national parks has proven unrealistic
in developing countries. Conservationists now reach out to
local communities, non-governmental organizations and even
the private sector to improve forest management in and
around parks and reserves. These innovative efforts have
overlooked what may be a key institution for conservation:
the military (but see McNeely er ciL. 1990).

Military forces hold substantial political, social and eco-
nomic power throughout most of Latin America. During the
development history of the Brazilian Amazon, military domi-
nance has accelerated deforestation and debilitated indigenous
resource management systems (Hecht and Cockburn. 1990).
Today military influence continues to be particularly intense at
development frontiers where forests of rich biodiversity
remain. To ignore the military in such areas is to disregard a
very real political force. Conservationists must work with the
military so as to check their environmentally destructive
actions, but use their authority to strengthen forest protection.

The Armed Forces of Ecuador has recently initialed activi-
ties with a potentially positive role in protecting the country's
endangered natural patrimony. Throughout 1991. the Santa
Cecilia Battalion (Sucumbios Province) confiscated illegal
timber coming from the upper reaches of the Aguarico and
San Miguel Rivers. Illegal wildlife and wildlife products were
seized as well. Those animals judged to be healthy were
released. Meanwhile, pelts, skins and feathers were burned at
roll-call in order to demonstrate the commitment of
Commander Lt. Col. Hernandez to halt the illegal wildlife
trade. The Battalion al.so actively protected a 8 sq. km natural
forest relic adjacent to their training grounds. El.sewhere in the
Ecuadorian Amazon, army battalions participated in the 1990
National Campaign Against Wildlife Trafficking, sponsored
by a group of national NGOs. In Ecuador's Sierran provinces,
conscripts have worked to reforest over 100 sq. km of steeply
eroded hillsides. In 1992, the National Forest Department
requested assistance from the Anned Forces to control arson
in the Pichincha Forest Reserve overlooking Quito.

Unfortunately, these are isolated deeds within a national
context of economic activities such as mining, oil production
and road construction that threaten Ecuador's forests.
Moreover, Ecuadorian conservation NGOs as well as resi-

dents of Amazonian provinces report that the Armed Forces
actively participate in the illegal domestic wildlife trade.
Indeed, in many Amazonian battalions, soldiers openly carry
macaws, tamarins and even ocelots. Hunting and fishing with
dynamite are common leisure activities for soldiers, often in
"protected areas" such as Yasuni National Park.

The Armed Forces of Ecuador demonstrate the potential
for both positive conservation action and environmental
destruction. For conservationists to ignore the powerful
impact of this institution on forest resources is unrealistic.
This is particularly true for national parks in the Ecuadorian
Amazon, where park guards are unarmed, weak in authority,
and, on average, each responsible for protecting over 1000
sq. km from illegal activities (Cabarle, 1989).

The potential consequences of including the military in
conservation programs will vary dramatically between coun-
tries. In war-torn areas or where military forces flagrantly
abuse human rights, the result would likely be disastrous.
The following specific factors merit attention in evaluating
the role of the military in forest conservation in tropical
South America:

1 ) The military is often the central authority at Amazonian
frontiers, where much of the remaining biodiversity is found.

2) Relative to other state agencies the military has superior
logistical capacity and access to information on physical
resources (potentially useful for park protection and moni-
toring).

3) Certain conservation issues require enforcement beyond
the capacity of a park service, particularly the illegal wildlife
trade. LInfortunately, the military is currently more likely to
participate in wildlife trafficking than to control it. as is the
case presently in Ecuador, Peru and Colombia.

Based on experiences working with the military in Ecuador,
conservationists are advised to proceed cautiously, but pro-
ceed. The military is capable of operating quickly on a big
scale; thus the potential for rapid results is high. A logical
first step is to promote environmental education for military
officers, and familiarise them with existing laws designed to
protect national forests and wildlife.

been for both subsistence and commercial purposes. In Latin
America, game is a vital protein source to many groups living
outside urban areas. As a general rule, wildlife is most impor-
tant to Indian groups, of somewhat lesser importance to settlers
of European descent who have lived for decades in tropical for-
est areas and of least importance to recently arrived colonists.
Indians have a stronger hunting tradition, they possess fewer
domestic animals and have less access to packaged meat.
Hunters generally take more mammals than birds and more
birds than reptiles (Redford and Robinson, 1987).

There are, throughout Amazonia and Latin America, certain
mammal and bird species which are by far and away the most
commonly killed game animals. The mammals include mon-
keys, peccaries, deer, armadillos and large rodents like paca and
capybara, while the birds include the guans and curassows, tou-
cans, trumpeters and macaws. Figures 5.1 and 5.2 compare the

importance of different mammal and bird species to Indian and
colonist groups (Redford, 1992).

The number of animals taken by subsistence hunters can be
very large. Over a period of less than a year, the 230 inhabitants
of three Waorani villages in Ecuador killed 3165 mammals,
birds, and reptiles. This total included 562 woolly monkeys
Lagothrix lagothricha. 313 Cuvier's toucans Ramphastos
cuvieri and 152 white-lipped peccaries. Certainly not all subsis-
tence hunters hunt at this intensity; but by using average kill
rates, it is possible to estimate the number of mammals killed in
one year by the rural population of Amazonian Brazil. In 1980,
there were an estimated 2,847,000 people living outside cities in
an area of 3,581,180 sq. km. This number of consumers, multi-
plied by the annual per capita consumption values of each mam-
malian family, derived from studies of colonist hunting
(Redford and Robinson, 1987), gives a figure of 14 million indi-

Forest Wildlife and Its Exploitation by Humans

INDIANS

COLONISTS

Cehiis apella
Black-capped capuchin

ScUiriJs
Squirrels

Tayas.su pecari
White-lipped peccar>'

Dasypus iwvemcinctu.'i
Long-nosed armadillo

Tciyassit tajactt
Collared peccary

AlpuaiUi spp.
Howler monkeys

Aretes spp.
Spider monkeys

Tamandua spp.
Lesser anteaters

Bradypus Iridactyla
Maned sloth

Tapinis tcrrestiis
Brazilian tapir

Figure 5.1 The importance of mammals to contemporary
Indian and colonist hunters. Only those species that were found
in at least five Indian studies and three colonist studies are
included. Bars denote the number of individuals of that taxon
killed per hunter per year. To give an idea of scale, there were
approximately 2.5 individual Cebus apella killed annually by
each Indian hunter and approximately 0.05 Tapirus terrestris.
Data from Redford and Robinson (1987). Source. Redfordi 1992)

vidual mammals killed each year. This figure indicates the
extent of subsistence hunting. Adding birds and reptiles, the
number of game animals killed each year in Amazonian Brazil
probably reaches 19 million individual animals.

In addition to this subsistence hunting, there has been exten-
sive commercial exploitation of wildlife in Neotropical forests.
Trade in wildlife did not assume major proportions until the
Europeans arrived and, as early as the 17th century, began the
commercial harvesting of manatees Trichechus spp. Giant river
turtles Podocnemis expansa and their eggs were extensively
exploited for commercial purposes. In the Amazon basin, the
eggs of this turtle were so abundant that an industry developed
to process them. Oil from the eggs was used for cooking and
lighting and by the 18th century a royal decree controlled the
lucrative harvest in Brazil (Smith, 1974).

Although no longer available on the scale once observed,
game is still readily obtained in many local markets. Castro et
al. (1975-1976) reported the meat of 24 species of wildlife for
sale, including six species of primates, in the markets of Iquitos,
Peru. They estimate that 1 1.000 primates were sold annually in
this market and that the inhabitants of the Peruvian department
of Loreto, which includes Iquitos, kill 370,000 monkeys
annually for consumption and sale.

In addition to meat, there has been extensive exploitation of
fauna for non-edible products — especially leather and skins.
Most of the recent market for leather has been for luxury items
such as purses, gloves and expensive shoes and has
concentrated on peccaries, capybara and various species of rep-
tiles. The most important wildlife in the leather industry at the
present time are the reptiles, principally the crocodilians. During
the peak of the trade in the 1950"s and 1960"s, five to 10 million
crocodilian skins were traded worldwide each year. The extent
of the market is staggering: for example, in Venezuela during
1930 and 1931. 3000 - 4000 caiman skins were being sold
daily, and between 1951 and 1980. Colombia legally exported
1 1,649,655 Caiman sclerops skins.

The trade in skins from Neotropical forests has focused on
only a relatively few species: giant otter Pleronura brasiliensis.
river otter Lutra longicaiidis. jaguar and "'ocelot" (Felis pardalis
and much smaller numbers of F. wiedii and F. tigrina). Between
1960 and 1969, 23,900 giant otter skins were exported from the
Peruvian and Brazilian Amazon (Smith. 1981b). In the 20 years
beginning in 1946, 22,644 giant otter skins, 90,574 river otter

Figure 5.2 The importance of birds to contemporary Indian
and colonist hunters. Only those species that were found in at
least five Indian studies and two colonist studies are included.
Bars denote the number of individuals of that taxon killed per
hunter per year. To give an idea of scale, there were approxi-
mately 0.9 individual Penelope spp. killed annually by each
Indian hunter and approximately 0.09 Ara spp. Data from
Redford and Robinson (1987).

Source: Redford (1 992 1

INDIANS

COLONISTS

Penelope spp.
Guans

Ramphastos spp.
Toucans

Crax spp.
Curassows

P Sophia spp.
Trumpeters

Cryplttrellus spp.
Tinamous

Amazona spp.
Amazons

Ara spp.
Macaws

Mitit spp.
Curassows

Forest Wildlife and Its Exploitation by Humans

90 —

80 -

Non-aame
Birds

70 -

60 -

50 —

40 —

30 —

Non-game
Birds

Ramphastidae(8)4,3'7f

Psittacidae (6/18) 6.2%

Psophidae ( 1 ) 4.7%

Phasianidae ( 1 ) 5.2%

Cracidae(4) 12.6%-

20 —

10 -

Tinaniidae (9) 18.8%

Game Birds (29) 9.1%

Biomass Number Specie.s

(190kg/km-) (319total)

Figure 5.3 Avian diversity in Amazonian Peru. Figures in
parentheses are numbers of species in each ta.xon.

SoiinT: Terborgh fl iil. 1 1990)

skins. 12.704 jaguar skins and 138,102 ocelot skins were
exported from the Amazon river port of Iquitos in Peru
(Grimwood. 1968).

Faunal Exploitation and Forest Ecology

The Neotropical forest mammal, bird, reptile and fish species
most affected by human activities are not a random subset of all
possible species in terms of size or food habits. They are almost
always the largest members of their group, and usually the
largest ones in the forest. The only exception to this pattern are
the large raptorial birds, which are not directly affected by
human activities (Redford, 1992). Amongst the mammals, the
large ungulates, primates, manatees and rodents are killed for
meat and the large carnivores (felids and otters) are killed for
their skins. Of the birds, the currasows (Cracidae). tinamous
(Tinaniidae), trumpeters (Psophiidae) and, less frequently, wad-
ing birds are killed for their meat. The large reptiles — caiman,
boas, turtles — are killed for their meat and hides. The largest
fish are always principal targets for fishermen.

The large-bodied species make up a significant part of the
biomass of unhunted communities of Neotropical vertebrates.

At Cocha Cashu in the Peruvian Amazon there are a total of 3 19
species of birds recorded. At this unhunted site, the tinamous,
wood quails (Phasianidae) guans and currasows (both in
Cracidae) and trumpeters, a total of only 15 species, make up
over 40 per cent of the avian biomass (Figure 5.3). At the same
site, there are 67 recorded species of non-tlying maminals. The
deer and peccaries, tapir, large rodents and large primates. 12
species in total, make up over 75 per cent of the biomass
(Janson and Emmons. 1990; Terborgh ei cil.. 1990). All of these
species are major game animals (Figure 5.4).

One of the results of this relationship between large size and
preferred game status is the dramatic effect of hunting on
density. In a comparison of large primate biomass in hunted and
unhunted sites, Peres (1990) showed that in unhunted areas
monkeys over 4 kg contributed 64.1 per cent to the primate bio-
mass compared to 16.2 percent in hunted sites.

The conclusions are clear: 1 ) many of the largest mammals
and birds in Neotropical forests are hunted: 2) these large animals
make up a very large proportion of the biomass in situations
where hunting does not occur; 3) densities, and therefore biomass
contribution, of these species are greatly decreased under both
moderate and heavy hunting pressure (Redford, 1992).

Figure 5.4 Diversity of non-flying mammals in Amazonian
Peru. Figures in parentheses are numbers of species in each

taxon. .Sci/nv Redliird I I'w:)

90 -

Rarely Hunied

24.8%

80 —

70 —

Large Primates (4)
35.6%

60 —

Aloualta = 1 1 .8%

Non-game

Ateles= 11.5%

Mammals

50 —

Cebus(2)= 12.3%

40 —

Large Rodents (4)
11.3%

30 —

Perissodactyla ( 1 )

7.3%

20 —

Artiodaclyla (3)
21.0%

10 —

Game Mammals (12)
17.9%

Biomass

(l?26.61<g/km-)

Number

Non-Volant Species

((i7lolall

Forest Wildlife and Its Exploitation by Humans

Management of Neotropical Forest Animals: Green Iguanas and Wild Macaws

One way to alleviate the pressure on wildlife, and yet meet the
food and cash requirements of local peoples, is the raising in
the household of small domestic animals, such as poultry and
pigs. A frequently proposed alternative is the raising/manage-
ment of native species, which are better adapted to local con-
ditions than conventional domestic species. Native animals
are close to the everyday experience of indigenous people;
hunters often possess detailed knowledge of wild species and
pets from the forest are a common sight in both Indian and
mestizo villages throughout the Neotropics. Two ongoing
promising efforts in forest wildlife management involve green
iguanas {liniaua igiuiiui) and macaws (Am sp.).

Throughout Central America, green iguanas are an appre-
ciated game animal, but hunting and habitat destruction are
contributing to declines of their populations. The Iguana
Management Project (IMP) in Panama is a joint venture of
the Smithsonian Institution and the Panamanian Pro-Iguana
Verde Foundation. The IMP focuses on developing captive
breeding techniques for the green iguana, in order to restore
the species populations in the wild and enhance its sustain-
able use by local peoples (Werner, 1991 ).

After several years, the project has collected a very
detailed data set on iguana reproductive ecology. Careful han-
dling of captive individuals, allows reproductive output,
clutch size and survival of young to be maximized. It is esti-
mated that 60 per cent of the released individuals survive. In
addition, in an effort to restore and increa.se the iguana's habi-
tat, the project stimulates planting of native trees by locals.

Although IMP reports successful trends in the captive
breeding and release to the wild of green iguanas, the pro-
ject's labour intensive approach means it is not yet competi-
tive with the exploitation of wild iguanas. Nevertheless, the
high national esteem of iguana meat and decreasing costs in
the captive rearing system could yield acceptable benefit/cost
ratios from IMP in the near future.

Another rather different approach to wildlife management
is illustrated by projects working on wild macaws
(Beissinger and Bucher, 1991: 1992). Throughout Amazonia,
macaws are eagerly sought for the pet trade and for food.
These factors, together with habitat destruction, have resulted

in a severe decline of wild macaw populations and an
increase in their market prices.

A group of North American and Peruvian .scientists, fund-
ed by Wildlife Conservation International, is working on
macaw ecology in Southeastern Peru (Munn et al.. 1991). In
this region, availability of nesting sites limits macaw popula-
tions. The natural rarity of suitable nesting sites (holes in
palms and big trees) has been exacerbated by the practice of
tree-felling to collect the chicks for the pet trade. This has
limited reproduction for an important fraction of adult pairs
every breeding season. The homeless adults become an
annoying bother for the breeding pairs, which is a factor in
chick inortality. resulting in further decreases in the popula-
tions' reproductive success.

Artificial nest sites built with local materials, mimicking
natural holes in palm trunks, were readily accepted by wild
macaws. Artificial nests have been used before, for instance
in the recovery of the Puerto Rican parrot Amazona vittata
(Synder et al.. 1987). The technique is simple, and can be
adapted to low-budget conditions. Artificial nests can con-
tribute to the recovery of wild populations, allow less
destructive pet collection (indeed, of chicks that would not
have lived otherwise) and can be used as a tourist attraction.

The management of forest animals faces extraordinary dif-
ficulties due to the normal low densities of populations and
low rates of growth and reproduction of many of the species.
This is particularly true for big to medium-sized mammals, a
group much sought after by hunters. Also, the money and
labour cost of management and uncertainty of benefits, can
decrease the acceptance of wildlife management projects by
local peoples. However, in the case of captive iguanas in
Panama and wild macaws in Peru, as well as in the case of
ox-bow lakes where caimans and fish can be reared, manage-
ment practices performed within natural or artificial enclo-
sures offer an appealing alternative to hunting of wild ani-
mals. Most likely, successful wildlife management efforts in
the Neotropical rain forest will be part of integrated
approaches, combining clearly-stated goals with ecological
knowledge and a sound assessment of local needs and
socio-economic conditions.

What IS a Forest?: The Flora vs The Fauna

Much of the world's concern about the loss of biodiversity
has been focused on tropical forests. Tall trees have tended to
be used as a symbol for the complete set of animal and plant
species found in tropical forests. This set of plant species is
being used by conservation biologists, park planners and oth-
ers as an indication of the health of the entire tropical forest
biota, a shorthand indicating conservation-worth (Redford.
1992).

Conservation programmers must recognise that confusing
forest plants with the forest fauna is a dangerous practice. What
is a forest to a forester, an ethnobotanist or a casual tourist, is
not necessarily a forest which contains ecologically functional
populations of vertebrate species. Many areas of Neotropical
forest have been emptied of their vertebrate fauna as a result of
human actions. Data from botanical, archaeological and anthro-
pological studies in many parts of the world, including the
Neotropics, have shown that humans have had widespread

impacts on fauna and flora. Indeed. Balee ( 1989: 14) has recent-
ly suggested that at least 1 1 .8 per cent of the terra finne forests
of the Brazilian Amazon, almost 400.000 sq. km. "exhibit tlie
continuing effects of past human inteiference".

In other words, the commonly held assumption that a good
community of trees is always equivalent to a healthy population
of vertebrates is fallacious. There are some species of verte-
brates which appear to be very sensitive to even low levels of
human activity, such as rubber tapping. Species that either leave
or are extirpated from these lightly affected forested areas
include woolly monkeys and some forest birds of prey. Many
other large vertebrate species have been severely affected by
hunting and indirect habitat destruction. In consequence, they
are present at such low densities that they can be considered
ecologically extinct — no longer interacting with other species
in the system at ecologically significant levels. Such species
include the most important predators, large-seed dispersers and
seed predators in the Neotropical forests (Janson and Emmons,

Forest Wildlife and Its Exploitation by Humans

Who owns the wild animals?

Rules governing wildlife ownership in human society date
back to the earliest human societies. Wildlife managers today
serve a broader agenda: to protect wildlife for ecological and
aesthetic, as well as material, purposes for present and future
human populations. The non-utilitarian goals require a trans-
formation in how wildlife ownership is defined. First, when
wildlife is protected for non-utilitarian purposes it becomes
difficult to identify exactly who benefits from a species' sur-
vival. Second, wildlife habitat transcends political bound-
aries. Therefore the domain of a single government is an
insufficient context for defining ownership and management
responsibility for many wildlife species. In other words, the
customary' set of property rights constructed for protecting a
community's hunting reserve does not suffice today for pro-
tecting, for instance, a given species of migratory warbler
and its habitat.

Property is the basic institution by which society guaran-
tees future income flow from a resource. Property rights link
"not merely a person to an object, but rather a person to an
object against other persons" (Bromley, 1989:202). The
three conventional types of property are: 1) state. 2) private
and 3) common. Economic theory would argue that efficient
resource management depends on the correct match of type
of property with type of resource.

Assigning an optimal property type to wildlife is difficult
due to its elusive status as a resource. To define a resource as
property one must be able to attribute a concrete value to it
and to distinguish between its u.sers and non-users. In the con-
text of wildlife these requisite specifications present prob-
lems, particularly for non-game species. First, it is difficult to
assign an exact ecological value to most species, let alone an
economic value. Second, the ecological and aesthetic services
of wildlife are not confined to a certain user group but instead
provide diffuse benefits to non-users over the long term.

Neotropical wildlife is held in various property forms,
with different consequences for its conservation (Lyster.
1985). The most conventional arrangement in Latin America
is the designation of wildlife as state property. Typically the
state establishes national parks or reserves in which to con-
serve this property for long-term public welfare. Due to their
status as public domain, national parks can be established at a
larger scale than most private or communal landholdings.
This is important for the survival of species requiring several
hundred square kilometres of forest. Unfortunately, through-
out Latin America, state agencies have found it difficult to
protect wildlife in these areas.

In response to the failure of the state to protect wildlife,
many people propose private ownership as an effective alter-
native for managing species. They argue that in Latin
America, private property receives maximum legal and polit-
ical support, allowing for strict protection of wildlife from
over-exploitation by non-owners. Nonetheless, private land-
holdings may prove inadequate in size for the long term con-
servation of many species. Furthermore, private owners may
ultimately choose to respond to market forces and disregard
the public good by overharvesting wildlife or converting
areas of natural habitat.

Common property is a third property arrangement that is
similar to private property as it is based on the exclusion of
non-owners. Communal ownership of game species is
widespread among subsistence hunting societies who have
developed long-term management techniques such as the
rotation of hunting areas within forested regions (Vickers.
1991). These common property regimes are optimal for
meeting the immediate resource needs of a local communi-
ty. In the development context, however, these systems
collapse under conditions of rapid population growth, colo-
nization, technology change and market penetration
(Chicchon, 1992). The breakdown of common property
systems eliminates putative regulations on individual use
of wildlife, leading to a situation of open access (Hardin,
1968). This condition of undefined property rights serious-
ly threatens wildlife survival because without clear proper-
ty rights, no one will invest in securing future benefits
from a resource.

No single property form is universally appropriate for
wildlife management; rather conservationists must establish
property rights appropriate to each context. Moreover, the
management of wildlife as a global commons challenges our
traditional definitions of property and forces us to consider
alternative property arrangements linking local managers to
the international community. New forms of defining wildlife
ownership are indeed already evolving in the form of interna-
tional treaties which restrict the trade of certain species.
Programmes designed to harvest Neotropical wildlife sus-
tainably are being tested which involve a combination of
property forms (see Box "3"). As wildlife becomes ever
more scarce, its ownership will become increasingly impor-
tant. Assigning the appropriate property rights to wildlife is
alone insufficient to guarantee its sur\ i\al. It is. however, a
necessary first step in establishing the good stewardship of
anv resource.

1991). It is these large animals that provide what Terborgh
(1988) has referred to as a "stabilizing function" . Animals like
black caiman Melanosiichiis niger. jaguars and harpy eagles
Harpia harpyja help maintain the incredible diversity of tropical
forests through "indirect effects" a term referring to "the propa-
gation of perturbations through one or more trophic levels in an
ecosystem, so that consequences are felt in organisms that may
seem far removed, both ecologically and ta.xonomically. from
the subjects of the perturbation."

The effect of hunting on large animals is not just of concern
to tho.se interested in biodiversity conservation and tropical
ecology. Wild animals provide an important source of nutrition

for millions of Neotropical forest dwelling humans — a subsidy
from nature without which many other activities, such as rubber
tapping, would not take place. Animals are also important as
pollinators and dispersers of economically important plant
species, as regulators of pest populations and for a myriad of
other reasons.

The bird, mammal and reptile species of Neotropical forests
represent an enormous variety of species, adaptations and beau-
ties. They have values intrinsic to themselves as well as values
to local and global humanity. Until these \alues are recognized
as independent from that of the tropical flora, their survival will
continue to be threatened.

Forest Wildlife and Its Exploitation by Humans

References

Alvard, M., and Kaplan. H. (1991). Procurement technology
and prey mortality among indigenous Neotropical hunters.
In: Human Predators and Prey Mortality, pp. 79-104. Stiner,
M.C. (ed.). Westview Press, Boulder.

Baker, R.H. ( 1991 ). The classification of Neotropical mammals
— A historical resume. In: Latin American Maminaloiiy. pp.
7-32. Mares, M.A. and Schmidley. D.J. (eds). University of
Oklahoma Press. Norman.

Balee. W. (1989). The culture of Amazonian forests. In:
Resource Management in Amazonia: Indigenous cuid Folk
Strategies, pp. 1-21. Posey. D.A. and Balee. W. (eds).
Advances in Economic Botany vol. 7.

Beissinger, S.R. and Bucher. E.H. (1991). Sustainable harvest
of parrots for conservation. In: New World Parrots in Crisis:
Solutions from Conservation Biology, pp. 73-115.
Beissinger. S.R. and Snyder. N.F.R. (eds). Smithsonian
Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

Beissinger. S.R. and Bucher. E.H. (1992). Can parrots be con-
served through sustainable harvesting? BioScience 42(3):
164-173.

Bodmer. RE., Fang. T.G.. Moya. L and Gill. R. (1994).
Managing wildlife to conserve Amazonian forests: popula-
tion biology and economic considerations of game hunting.
Biological Conservation 67: 29—35.

Bourliere. F. (1973). The comparative ecology of rain forest
mammals in Africa and tropical America: some introductory
remarks. In: Tropical Forest Ecosystems in Africa and South
America: A Comparative Review, pp. 279-292. Meggers.
B.J.. Ayensu. E.S. and Duckworth. W.D. (eds). Smithsonian
Institution Press. Washington D.C.

Bourliere. F. (1989). Mammalian species richness in tropical
rainforests. In: Vertebrates in Complex Tropical Systems, pp.
152-168. Harmelin-Vivien. M.L. and Bourliere. F. (eds).
Springer Verlag.

Bromley. D.W. (1989). Economic Interests and Institutions:
The Conceptual Foundations of Public Policy. Basil
Blackwell. New York.

Cabarle, B.J.. Crespi. M.. Dodson. C./H.. Luzuriaga. C Rose.
D. and Shores, J.N. (1989). An Assessment of Biological
Diversity and Tropical Forests for Ecuador. USAID/Ecuador
Document published by World Resources Institute.
Washington. D.C.

Castro. N.. Revilla. J. and Neville. M. (1975-1976). Carne de
monte como una fuente de proteinas en Iquitos. con referen-
da especial a monos. Revista Forestal del Peru 6: 19-32.

Chicchon. A. (1992). Chimane Resource Use and Market
Involvement in the Beni Biosphere Reserve, Bolivia.
Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Florida.
Gainesville.

Diamond. A.W. (1985). The selection of critical areas and cur-
rent conservation efforts in tropical forest birds. In:
Consenation of Tropical Forest Birds, pp. 33—49. Diamond.
A.W. and Lovejoy, T.E. (eds). ICBP Technical Publication
No. 4. Cambridge. England.

Dixon. J.R. (1979). Origin and distribution of reptiles in low-
land tropical rainforests of South America. In: The South
American Herpelofauna: Its Origin. Evolution, and
Dispersal, pp. 217-240. Duellman. W.E. (ed.). Monograph
of the Museum of Natural History. University of Kansas,
Lawrence, Kansas.

Duellman, W.E. (1979). The South American herpetofauna: A
panoramic view. In: The South American Herpetofauna: Its

Trade in skins from the Neotropics has focussed on relaiively
few species: the ocelot being one of them. (Kent Redford)

Origin. Evolution, and Dispersed, pp. 1-28. Duellman. W.E.

(ed.). Monograph of the Museum of Natural History.

University of Kansas. Lawrence. Kansas.
Duellman. W.E. (1991). Herpetofaunas in Neotropical rain-
forests: comparative composition, history, and resource use.

In: Four Neotropical Rainforests, pp. 455-508. Gen'ry. A.H.

(ed.). Yale University Press. New Haven.
Eisenberg, J.F. (1989). Mammals of the Neotropics. The

Northern Neotropics. University of Chicago Press,

Chicago.
Eisenberg, J.F. (1990). Neotropical mammal communities. In:

Four Neotropical Rainforests, pp. 358-370. Gentry. A.H.

(ed.). Yale University Press. New Haven.
Emmons, L.H. (1987). Comparative feeding ecology of felids in

a Neotropical rainforest. Behavioral Ecology and

Sociohiology 20: 271-283.
Emmons. L.H. (1990). Neotropical Rainforest Marunals. A

Field Guide. University of Chicago Press. Chicago.
Gentry. A.H. (ed.) (1990). Four Neotropical Rainforests. Yale

University Press. New Haven.
Goulding. M.. Leal Carvalho. M. and Ferreira. E.G. (1988). Rio

Negro. Rich Life in Poor Water. SPB Academic Publishing

bv. The Hague.
Grimwood. l.R. (1968). Notes on the Distribution and Status of

Forest Wildlife and Its Exploitation by Humans

some Peruvian Mciiiunals. American Committee for
International Wild Life Protection. Bronx. New York.

Hardin, G. (1968). The Tragedy of the Commons. Science
162:1243-1248.

Hecht. S. and Cockburn. A. (1990). The Fate of I lie Forest:
Developers. Destroyers and Defenders of the Amazon.
Harper Perennial Press. New York.

Janson, C.H. and Emmons. L.H. (1990). Ecological structure of
the nonflying mammal community at Cocha Cashu
Biological Station, Manu National Park. Peru. In: Four
Neotropical Rainforests, pp. 314-338. Gentry. A.H. (ed.).
Yale University Press. New Haven.

Karr, J.R. (1989). Birds. In: Ecosystems of the World, vol. I4B.
Leith, H. and Werger. M.J. A. (eds). Elsevier Press. Elsevier.
New York.

Karr. J.R.. Robinson. S., Blake, J.G. and Bierregaard. Jr.. R.O.
(1990). Birds of Four Neotropical Forests. In: Four
Neotropical Rainforests, pp. 237-269. Gentry, A.H. (ed.).
Yale University Press. New Haven.

Keast, A. (1985). Tropical Rainforest Avifaunas: an
Introductory Conspectus. In: Conservation of Tropical
Forest Birds, pp. 3-33. Diamond. A.W. and Lovejoy, T.E.
(eds). ICBP Technical Publication No. 4, Cambridge.
England.

Lowe-McConnell, R.H. (1987). Ecological Studies in Tropical
Fish Communities. Cambridge University Press. New York.

Lyster. S. (1985). International Wildlife Law. Grotius
Publications Ltd, Cambridge, England.

McNeely. J.A.. Miller. K.R.. Reid. W.V.. Mittermeier. R.A. and
Werner. T.B. (1990). Conserving the World's Biological
Diversit^^. lUCN. Gland. Switzerland.

Mitchell, C.L.. and Raez-Luna. E.F. (1990). The Effects of
Hunting by Indigenous People on Prey Densities in the Manu
Biosphere Reserve, Peru. Paper presented at the Workshop
on Protected Areas and Parks of the 'Reunion Internacional
Experiencias para el Desarrollo Sostenido de la Ama/onia".
Lima. Peru.

Munn. C.A.. Blanco D.S.. Nycander M.E. and Ricalde. DR.
(1991). Prospects for sustainable use of large macaws in
Southeastern Peru. In: Proceedings of the First
Mesoamerican Workshop on the Conservation of Macaws.
Clinton-Eitniear. J. (ed.). Center for the Study of Tropical
Birds. San Antonio. Texas.

Patton. J.L., Berlin. B. and Berlin, E.A. (1982). Aboiiginal per-
spectives of a mammal community in Amazonian Peru:
knowledge and utilization patterns among the Aguaruna
Jivaro. In: Maniinalian Biology in South America, pp.
1 1 1-128. Mares, M.A. and Genoways. H.H. (eds). Volume 6
(Bats) Special Publication series. Pymatuning Laboratory of
Ecology University of Pittsburg.

Peres, C.A. (1990). Effects of hunting on western Amazonian
primate communities. Biological Consenation 54: 47-59.

Redford. K.H. (1992). The empty forest. BioScience 42:
412-422.

Redford. K.H. and Robin.son, J.G. (1987). The game of choice.
Patterns of Indian and colonist hunting in the Neotropics.
American Anthropologist 89: 650-667.

Redford. K.H. and Robinson. J.G. ( I99I ). Subsistence and com-
mercial uses of wildlife in Latin America. In: Neotropical
Wildlife Use and Conservation, pp. 6-23. Robinson. J.G. and
Redford, K.H. (eds). University of Chicago Press. Chicago.

Smith, N.J.H. (1974). Destructive exploitation of the South

American river turtle. Association of Pacific Coast

Geographers 36: 85-102.
Smith. N.J.H. (1981a). Man. Fishes, and the Amazon. Columbia

University Press. New York.
Smith. N.J.H. (1981b). Caimans, capybara. otters, manatees.

and man in Amazonia. Biological Consenation 19: 177-187.
Snyder. N.F.R., Wiley. J.W. and Kepler. C.B. (1987). The

Parrots of Luquillo: The Biology and Conservation of the

Puerto Rican Parrot. Western Foundation for Vertebrate

Zoology. Los Angeles. California.
Stiles, E.G. (1983). Birds In: Costa Rican Natural History.

Janzen. D.H. (ed.). The University of Chicago Press,

Chicago, Illinois
Stiles, G.F. ( 1985). On the role of birds in the dynamics of

Neotropical forests. In: Conservation of Tropical Forest

Birds, pp. 49-63. Diamond. A.W. and Lovejoy, T.E. (eds).

ICBP Technical Publication No. 4, Cambridge, England.
Terborgh, J. (1988). The big things that run the world - a sequel

to E. O. Wilson. Consenation Biology 2: 402^03.
Terborgh, J., Emmons, L.H. and Freese, C. ( 1986). La faune sil-

vestre de la Amazoni'a: el despilfarro de un recurso renov-

able. Boletin de Lima iPerii) 46: 77-85.
Terborgh. J., Robinson. S., Parker III, T.A., Munn, C.A. and

Pierpont, N. (1990). Structure and organization of an

Amazonian forest bird community. Ecological Monographs

60(2): 213-238.
Thiollay. J. (1984). Raptor community structure of a primary

rain forest in French Guiana and effect ol human hunting

pres'^uve. Raptor Research 18: 117-122.
Vasquez, P.G. and Barrena. V.M. (1990). Diseho de una

Metodologia para el Monitoreo del Impacto dc las

Actividades Huinanas en Areas Protegidas de la Amazonia

Peruana. Conservation Data Center. Peru and European

Economic Community. Lima, Peru.
Vickers. W.T. (1991). Hunting yields and game composition

over ten years in an Amazon Indian territory. In: Neotropical

Wildlife Use and Consenation. Robinson, J.G. and Redford.

K.H. (eds). University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Werner, D.I. (1991). The rational use of green iguanas. In:

Neotropical Wildlife Use and Conservation, pp. 181-201.

Robinson, J.G. and Redford. K.H. (eds). The University of

Chicago Press. Chicago.
Willig, M.R. and Sandlin, E.A. (1991). Gradients of species

diversity and species turnover in New World bats: A com-
parison of quadrat and band methodologies. In: Latin

American Mammalogy, pp. 81-96. Mares. M.A. and

Schmidley, D.J. (eds). University of Oklahoma Press.

Norman, Oklahoma.
WCMC (1992). Global Biodiversity: Status of the Earth's

Living Resources. Chapman and Hall, London xx + 594 pp.
Wilson, D.E. (1990). Mammals of La Selva, Costa Rica. In:

Four Neotropical Rainforests, pp. 273-286. Gentry, A.H.

(ed.). Yale University Press. New Haven.

Authors: Kent H. Redford. Lisa Naughton and Ernesto
Raez-Luna. all at Program for Studies in Tropical Conservation.
Florida University. Gainesville with contributions from Mariano
Gimenez-Dixon, ILFCN, Switzerland and Nigel Sizer. WRI

6 Forest Peoples

Origins

Archaeologists are uncertain how long ago human beings
arrived in the New World. It is thought that they might have
first crossed the Bering Strait — periodically a landbridge — as
long as 45.000 years ago. What is clear, though, is that various
Indian peoples have been living in the forests of Central and
South America for thousands of years.

Hunting, fishing and gathering was the main way of life of the
early migrants and remains important for most lowland forest
dwellers today. Yet. the Neotropics also saw the very early domes-
tication of crops. Maize, beans and squashes. New World yams and
cocoyams, cassava and chillies were some of the most important,
all well suited to the region's moist climate and poor forest soils.

Where environmental and social conditions were favourable,
such as along the silt-laden banks of the rivers draining the
Andes and on the lime-rich soils of the Yucatan, dense popula-
tions built up. allowing civilisations to flourish and fade long
before Europeans first set about colonising the continent.

Best known of these forest cultures was the Mayan civilisa-
tion of the Yucatan, which had endured for several hundred
years and had already passed its peak by the time that Spanish
conquistadors arrived (Stephen and Wearne, 1984). Yet even in
decline, the population density of the Mayans awed the
Spaniards. As Bishop Bartolome de Las Casas, who spoke out
against the excesses of the conquistadors, noted "all that has
been discovered up to the year forty-nine (1549) is full of peo-
ple, tike a hive of bees, so that it seems that God had placed all.
or the greater part of. the hunum race in these countries. "

Recent archaeological research has revealed highly complex
civilisations along the Orinoco and Amazon, especially on
Marajo island at the great river's mouth. These were based on
fishing and turtle farming, as well as on maize, manioc and bean
cultivation on periodically flooded banks and islets (Roosevelt,
1980). When the first Spaniards descended the Amazon in the
16th century, they saw Indian settlements all along the banks of
the river, from the area of the Omagua people on the present
Peruvian border right down to the river's mouth.

The fertile Amazon floodplains were densely settled and
large numbers of people migrated outwards from them into the
less fertile hinterlands to north and south. Here, along the nutri-
ent-poor black water rivers and on the sandy soils in the bound-
less forests of the Guyanan and Brazilian shields, the Indians
adopted much more dispersed residence patterns, dependent on
hunting, gathering and shifting cultivation. Yet they were far
from isolated. Intricate trading networks linked the communities
along the different river systems over thousands of miles. These
trade and cultural exchanges reached up into the densely popu-
lated Andean highlands and across the Caribbean to Florida.

Sustainable Livelihoods

The Indians' long familiarity with their environment has given
them a profound understanding of the possibilities and limits
of the forests. As ethnobiologists are now beginning to appre-
ciate, Indian lore regarding plants and animals, soils and
waters, climate and seasons is both rich and detailed and pro-
vides the basis for complex systems of resource use and man-
agement (Posey. 1983; Clay. 1988). Some Indian groups make
use of literally hundreds of plant species as medicines,
potions, poisons, drugs and charms. Plants are used as dyes,
paints, resins, basts, curares, ropes, clubs, bows and arrows,
baskets, bark cloth, hammocks, huts and canoes, and for a
thousand other purposes. The Indians' subtle understanding of
animal behaviour allows them to interpret spoor and animal
calls to maximise their efficiency as hunters (Colchester.
1982a). Yet, the forests are much more to the Indians than nat-
ural resources, they also provide them with the symbols by
which they order their social and intellectual universe (Nelson,
1977; Lizot, 1986).

Some scientists have postulated that these symbolic schemes
provide Ainazonian Indian shamans with the means directly to
regulate human behaviour and their interactions with nature
(Reichel-Dolmatoff. 1976). Hunting taboos, sexual mores and
religious festivals may ensure that human numbers and prac-
tices do not lead to over-exploitation of the environment. It is,
however, difficult to establish this scientifically, but what is
clear is that the combination of practical lore and Indian social
and political processes act efficiently, if indirectly, to moderate
pressure on the environment. In the resource-poor intertluves
of the Amazon basin, villages are small, dispersed and mobile,
reflecting a political system in which power is diffuse and
rights and obligations are focused on small kin groups.
Mobility, warfare, trekking and an identity with a general terri-
tory rather than ties to small plots of land combine to ensure
that depleted areas can be left to recover naturally (Colchester,
1981 and see Box 1).

Social and technological change upsets this subtle balance
between the Indians and their environment. The Indians' rising
demand for manufactured goods obliges them to produce a sur-
plus for exchange. New technologies bring more destructive
impacts and increase the range over which supplies can be col-
lected. Mission schools, dispensaries, air-strips and trading
posts, as well as new machines to process crops and forest prod-
ucts, restrict the mobility of Indian communities. The result is
local environmental depletion; making a living becomes harder
work and whilst dependence on new technologies may increase,
nutritional standards fall (Colchester, 1981, 1982b and see
Figures 6.1 and 6.2).

Forest Peoples

We Respect the Forest

'We Indians were born, work, live anil die in die basin of
die Madre de Dios river of Peru. It is our land — die only
duniJ we have, with its plants, animals and small farms:
an environment we understand and use welt. We are not
like those from outside who want to clear everything
away, destroying the richness and leaving the forest
ruined forever. We respect the forest, we make it produce
for us.

Many people ask why we want so much land. They
think we do not work all of it. But we work it differently
from them, consening it so that it will continue to produce
for our children and our grandchildren. Although some
people want to take it from us, they destroy and abandon
it. moving on elsewhere. But we cannot do that: we were
horn in our woodlands. Without them we will die. '

Statement by the Ainarakaeri of eastern Peru (Moody.
1988).

Conquest and Enslavement

Unfortunately other pressures from outside pose a far greater
threat to the survival of Indian communities and their forests
than inlensifymg trade (Bodley. 1982). For if Europeans have
praised the Indians for their natural honesty, they have equally
coveted their lands and resources.

The pattern was set right from first contact. As Christopher
Columbus noted of the Arawak peoples who predominated in
the Caribbean: 'they love their neighbours as themselves and
their way of speaking is the sweetest in the world, always gentle
and smiling . . . They are so affectionate and have so little greed
and are in all ways so amenable, that there is in my opinion no
better people and no better land in all the world'. In almost the
same breath he reported to the Spanish crown they should be
good servants and intelligent . . . should your Highness com-
mand it, all the inhabitants could be taken to Castile or held as
slaves on the island, for with fifty men we could subjugate them
all and make them do whatever we wish (Cohen, 1969).

So it was to be. After some fierce wars of conquest, which
endured for several decades in Central America, the Indians
were enslaved or made to work for their new masters. The
Europeans and their African slaves also brought new diseases to
the continent. Literally millions of Indians perished as epi-
demics of smallpox, viral infections and tuberculosis swept
through the interior. In Mesoamerica as a whole, the Indian pop-
ulation declined from 14 million to two million between 1524
and 1600 (Fried et ai, 1983). In the Caribbean, the Indian peo-
ples declined to almost nothing, today being limited to small
communities on the islands of Roatan, Dominica and Trinidad
(Wilbert, 1972).

The fatal vulnerability of the Indians to Old World diseases
remains a problem to this day. In isolated areas, a single epi-
demic of an infection like measles has been known to kill off up
to .^0 per cent of a village, while repeated epidemics have led to
extinctions of whole peoples (Colchester, 1984).

The initial aim of the colonists was to seize gold and silver.
Early successes in Mesoamerica and in the Andes led to fantas-
tic expeditions to the headwaters of some of the main rivers of
Amazonia in search of fictional Indian kingdoms with fabulous
wealth. These dreams were turned to more practical ends as the

Table 6.1 Estimated numbers of Indians in tropical forests in 1492

Area People

Caribbean 6 million

Mesoamerica 14 million

Lowland South America* Id million

Total 30 million

including the Pacific coast

Source: Estimates are deiived from: Wilbert. 1972; Denevan. 1976; Hemming, 1978; Fried et
til.. 1983; Coppens. 1983-89 and other documents in Surxival International's archives. It must.
howe\er. be noted that there is considerable debate about these numbers.

new colonies were developed to produce sugar, dyes and cotton
for the metropolitan centres in Europe. Indian labour was in
sharp demand and force had to be used to prise the Indians from
their self-sufficient communities. Slaving expeditions to provide
labour for the sugar plantations and mills of Brazil's northeast
coast led to the first main assault on the Amazon. Rowed
painfully upstream by Indian slaves, whole Indian communities
were captured and taken back down to the coast by the
Portuguese.

By 1650, the Vice General of the Portuguese colony of
Maranhao at the mouth of the Amazon claimed that almost two
million Indians had been killed, destroyed 'in their violent
labour, exhausting discoveries aiul unjust wars'. By the turn of the
century, the lower Amazonian rivers were almost completely
depopulated and the slaving expeditions were forced to travel
far up the Amazon and its tributaries to secure more workers
(Hemming, 1978). Eventually, the plantations of the Caribbean
and South America were supplied with African slaves, groups
of whom would periodically escape into the forests, some man-
aging to re-establish viable Afro-Amerindian societies, the
so-called "Bush Negroes" of Surinam and French Guiana.

Despite the almost total annihilation of the Indians of the lower
Amazon and Caribbean and the subjugation of the Indians of cen-
tral America, other Indian societies of lowland South America and
the Atlantic coast of Mesoamerica survived the era of conquest as
autonomous societies (Nietschmann. 1973; CEDI/PETI, 1990).

Figure 6.1 The traditional system of resource use. In this sys-
term, the negative feedback cycle prevents excessive long-term
use of the environment. Source: Colchester (1981)

New community wtlh
traditional technology

Gradual depletion of
local forest products

Increase in time required

to satisfy nutritional

needs

Increasing discontent

with locality. Fission

and/or relocation more

likely

Forest Peoples

New community with
industrial technology

Increased depletion of
local forest products

Increase in time required

to satisfy needs, both
nutritional and for trade

Increasing reliance t
new technology

Increased local destruction of
primary forests

Gardens more distant and

larger to create surplus for

trade

Increasing dependence

on engines to reach gardens

and machines to process crops

Increasing infrastructural
commitment prevents movement

Increasing demand for

surplus producton to

pay for new technology

Figure 6.2 The modern system of resource use. Here the
positive feedback cycle exaggerates the speed of environmental
destruction and this leads to increasing dependence on the out-
side world. Source: Colchester ( 1 98 1 1

Supplying the Marltet

Authority for the Indians in the Spanish and Portuguese colonies
was shared between the Church and the landlords. In frontier
zones where the colonial economies barely penetrated, the Church
was often entrusted with full control of the Indians. Where possi-
ble, the Indians were forced to relocate from their dispersed home-
steads and villages to leducciones — large settlements supervised
by the missions. Relations between the Indians and the Church
were far from easy, yet the stem paternalism was often preferable
to the uncontrolled exploitation of the landowners.

For the vast majority of the Indians, colonial rule denied
them any firm rights to their traditional lands. A small number
of communities were able to secure colonial titles but for the
rest their best security lay either in isolation or with the inis-
sions whose fiefdoms acted as a buffer to land annexation.
Independence of American nations from colonial rule in the
early nineteenth century brought no improvement. On the con-
trary, new export crops, such as coffee, cardamom and bananas,
liberated markets and new forms of transport and refrigeration,
all intensified the pressure on Indians in upland and coastal
forests alike. In Central America, great swathes of forested
Indian land on both coasts were taken over by plantations and
ranches, while coffee estates expanded up the mountains forcing
the Indians to clear tiny plots for their maize fields right up to
the tree line (Plant. 1978; Annis, 1987).

The main trading opportunity offered by Amazonia was the
region's rubber, which, after the discovery of the process of vul-
canisation, found many applications in the industrial world. The
result was a prodigious economic boom which made cities such as
Manaus and Iquitos into important trade centres. For the first lime
colonists migrated en masse into Amazonia (Hemming, 1987).

The traders" wealth was based almost entirely on the manual
labour of the Indians. They alone knew where the rubber trees
were, scattered throughout the iminense forest. Rubber barons
used the most extreme means to force the Indians to work for

them leading to the violent deaths of hundreds of thousands of
people. A detailed expose of these excesses found, in the
Pututnayo region alone, that 'in the course of the last 12 vears
1 1900-1912). the number of Indians killed either by starvation
— often deliberately brought about by the destruction of crops
throughout entire regions, or inflicted as a death penalty on
individuals who were unable to fill their rubber c/uota — or by
deliberate murder by gunfire, burning, decapitation or flagella-
tion and accompanied by a variety of atrocious tortures, in
order to extract a total of four thousand tons of rubber, cannot
be lower than thirty thousand, and might possibly be vastly
higher' (Taussig, 1987:20). In Brazil, from 1900 onwards,
fifty-nine tribes were exterminated in the course of the activities
related to rubber extraction (Davis, 1977).

With the advent of Asian rubber plantations by 1915, the
price of Amazonian rubber collapsed. Economic recession fol-
lowed as suddenly as the boom had come and outside interest in
the Amazon waned for half a century, providing the Indians
with a brief respite.

In 1910, the great Indianist and explorer Candido Rondon led
a new Indian Protection Service (SPI) in Brazil. This Service
aimed to protect Indian lives, lands and cultures and also to
reduce the attentions of Christian missionaries. It flourished in
its early years but was starved of resources until a revival in the
1950s, when the Villas Boas brothers were creating the first
Indian park on the upper Xingu River. The SPI collapsed amid
scandals in 1967 and was replaced by the National Indian
Foundation (FUNAl), which has had a chequered history.
However, over a hundred Brazilian Indian tribes now have rela-
tive security of tenure of over 200,000 sq. km of their land
thanks to the work of some officials of the SPI and FTJNAI and
some missionaries.

Imposed Development

The present century has witnessed an exponential increase in
forest loss as Indian territories have been expropriated to make
way for development. In Central America, the upland forests
have been squeezed by the double pressure of expanding cash
cropping regimes and mechanization. Large areas of hill forest
have been directly cleared for crops such as coffee and car-
damom, while much more has been cut down by peasant farm-
ers forced off the more fertile valley lands by the expansion of
the large estates, the owners of which want the Indians" lands
but no longer require their labour. The growing concentration of
land in the hands of agribusinesses remains the main threat to
Central America's forests and is leading to an accelerating
migration of landless peasants, mainly of Indian descent, into
the lowland forests (Utting, 1991).

Yet, even in the lowlands, the inequities of land holdings
replicate themselves. Since Indians and peasants lack clear
title to their lands, cleared areas are readily taken over by the
rich and powerful to create new estates, mainly for cattle (see
Box 2). Indian protests and demands for land security and
agrarian reform have led to repression and massacres. In
Guatemala, this process culminated in a civil war in which just
to be Indian was to be identified as a target for counter-insur-
gency. In all some 100,000 people were killed and 40,000
"disappeared" in the turmoil of the early 1980s, while some
400 Indian villages were destroyed and at least 1,000,000
peasants displaced as internal refugees. According to official
figures some 200,000 Guatemalans fled the country during
these years and nearly 46,000 have still to return (Colchester
and Lohmann, 1992).

Forest Peoples

The Sierra de las Minas Biosphere Reserve

The Sierra de las Minas in eastern Guatemala harbours a rich
forest system with a very wide range of Central American
fauna. It is considered to have the highest diversity of tropi-
cal pine species in the world. A 2.360 sq. km area of the
range was legally designated a biosphere reserve in 1990.

The problems confronting the area are typical of the
Central American dilemma. Over the past half century, the
northern flanks of the Sierra have been settled by tens of thou-
sands of K'ekchi Indians who have been displaced from the
more fertile lowlands by logging, ranching and cardamom
cultivation. The poor soils on the sleep mountain slopes make
stable agriculture almost impossible, implying a progressive
degradation of the environment as the Indians are obliged to
clear new areas, once their old plots become exhausted. At the
same lime, two thirds of the area have been secured as private
property by largely absentee landlords, most of whom plan to
sell the area's timber to pulp and sawmills in the Motagua

valley to the south and turn the hills over to cattle.

The Guatemalan Foundation promoting the Reserve
recognises that it cannot be made viable without buying up
the privately owned lands of the rich and acquiring other
areas of fertile valley land outside the reserve, or in the
"Buffer Zone" of the biosphere reserve, to resettle the
Indians. The problems in this area demonstrate with startling
clarity the fact that, in Central America, the conservation of
natural resources is inextricably linked to the need for a
redistribution of land.

The political obstacles to such an approach ha\ e also been
made clear. Predictably, the landowner lobby has mounted an
adxertising campaign in national newspapers to vehemently
denounce the conservation plan as an assault on private prop-
erty. All those who advocate providing alternative lands to
the Indians have been labelled as "communists" (Colchester
and Lohmann, 1992).

In Amazonia, pressure to annex Indian lands is much more
recent, commencing on a large-scale in the 1970s with the con-
struction of the TransAmazonica highway (Brooks et al.. 1973).
In the early 1980s, World Bank-funded projects in Mato Grosso
and Rondonia led to wideseale colonisation of Indian lands with
whole communities being all but wiped out by epidemics
(Johnson el al.. 1989; Sur\ival International France, 1990).
Many of the migrants to Rondonia were peasants displaced by
agribusiness from the south Brazilian states such as Santa
Catarina and Rio Grande do Sul. At the same time, in the states
of Para and Maranhao, the Grande Carajas regional develop-
ment programme, brought catastrophic health and cultural prob-
lems to the Indians of the region (Treece, 1987). The extensive
networks of roads also fostered a frenzy of land speculation
(Branford and Clock. 1985; Hecht and Cockburn, 1989), so that
the southern and south-eastern sections of the Amazonian for-
est, which thirty years ago were barely subject to land claims,
are now a chequer-board of often overlapping indigenous
reserves, individual land titles, logging concessions and mining
claims (CEDI. 1985; CEDI/CONAGE, 1988).

The pattern has been repeated in neighbouring countries. In
Colombia, the Caqueta was for a time promoted as a colonisa-
tion zone and in Ecuador, extensive oil prospecting has opened
Indian territories to settlement by landless poor from the high-
lands (Hicks er al., 1990). Planned colonisation, often along
logging roads, has occurred too in Peru and Bolivia (Leonel,
1992), while landless Brazilian peasants displaced by mecha-
nised soya cultivation in Parana and Mato Grosso do Sul
streamed into the forested lands of the Mbya Indians of eastern
Paraguay. In the north of Brazil, poverty-stricken migrants have
invaded Indian lands to work as gold-prospectors, many over-
running the frontiers onto Indian territories in Venezuela and
Guyana. In the conflicts and outcries which have ensued local
politicians have condemned the Indians as "obstacles to
progress" and charged their supporters as agents for foreign
interests (Burger, 1987)

Past attempts to exploit Amazonia to supply markets in the
densely settled coastal and mountainous parts of the Amazon
countries has been characterized by Emilio Moran as growth
without development'. It represents the antithesis of the indige-
nous peoples" approach, which starts with subsistence and

social requirements and draws on a long experience of local
environments (Moran. 1983: Monbiot, 1991).

However, conservation efforts have until recently been
hardly more considerate of Indian rights. In most Latin
American countries national parks are state-owned lands and
legislation outlaws residence, hunting, fishing or the cutting of
vegetation, thus rendering Indian systems of land-use illegal
(Clad, 1984). As one Yaruro spokeswoman from Venezuela
complains of a Park established on her peoples' territory 'we
are prohibited from movint; to our hunting grounds and to the
areas where we seasonally colled wild fruits. It is like being
told that you cannot go to the kitchen or the bathroom in your
own house. We demand title to our lands. Caramba! We are
not children. '

Fighting Back

The Indians ha\ e resisted these impositions ever since first con-
tact (Gray, 1987). War and rebellion were a regular feature of
the early years of the conquest and Indians still resort to armed
resistance when other means fail. Until recently in Brazil, it has
been relatively commonplace for Indians, denied effective pro-
tection or the means to represent themseUes in courts and local
government, to take up arms to defend their lands from inva-
sions by settlers, loggers and ranchers. However, the last 30
years have seen the evolution of a quieter but no less formidable
expression of Indian power.

The process of organising for change started in Amazonia in
the early 1960s with the creation of the Federation of Shuar
Centres, by which the Shuar people united to defend their lands
on the Ecuadorean frontier. Within twenty years land title had
been gained for the majority of Shuar communities; they estab-
lished their own radio station broadcasting in their own lan-
guage and developed bilingual and bicultural education pro-
grammes. Primary health care programmes administered by the
Indians were de\ eloped with State assistance.

The Shuar experience has been repeated \\ ith numerous
variations all over Amazonia. Clusters of communities along
the same river valley have come together to form local cultur-
al associations. Regionally they have grouped their new com-
munity-based organizations into national confederations. The
majority of Amazonian Indian communities are now linked to

Forest Peoples

these kinds of institutions, some of which have become so
well organized and respected that western governments are
directly financing their work from their overseas development
budgets. In some places, enlightened missionaries have also
helped organise Indian political resistance.

National governments have also come to respect the strength
and legitimacy of these Indian organisations. Most compare
very favourably, in terms of their accountability and their repre-
sentativeness, with the often corrupt local government structures
which they parallel. Mass mobilisations of Indians, under the
leadership of these organisations, has also obliged governments
to heed their demands (see Box 3).

In Amazonia, these national confederations have also united as
an Amazon-wide organisation, the Coordinating Body for the
Indigenous Organisations of the Ainazon Basin (COICA), in order
to be heard directly by the international community. Indians have
taken their concerns to inter-governmental agencies such as the
United Nations, the World Bank and the International Tropical
Timber Organisation to press for a recognition of their rights.

In Central America, the Indians are no less organised into
local, national, regional and international organisations.
Recently, both they and the Amazonian groups have linked
together with indigenous organisations from all around the trop-
ics into an International Alliance of the Indigenous-Tribal
Peoples of the Tropical Forests, which has entered into dialogue
with the UNCED process, the European Commission, the
Global Environment Facility and many national Governments.

The increasing power of indigenous organisations is reflected
in advances made in international law. A new Convention (No.
169) of the International Labour Organisation, which clearly
recognises Indian rights to their territories, comes into force this
year. A Declaration of the Rights of the Indigenous Peoples of
the Americas is expected from the Organisation of American
States in 1993, and a Universal Declaration of the Rights of
Indigenous Peoples is already going through its third draft at the
United Nations (Davis. 1988; UN. 1991 ).

New Models

The Indians' struggle to reassert their traditions and control
their lives and environment has important implications for the
future of the forests in the Neotropics. It implies — in areas
subject to their control — an end to major road-building, min-

ing, hydropower and colonisation schemes and the application
of another model of development more sensitive to human
needs and the limitations of the forests (Chirif et al., 1991 ).

As the Coordinating Body for the Indian Organisations of the
Amazon Basin has put it; 'Development can only occur when
the people it iijfects participate in the design of proposed poli-
cies, and the model which is implemented thereby corresponds
to the local people 's aspirations. Development can be guaran-
teed only when the foundations are laid for the sustained
well-being of the region, only continued poverty can be guaran-
teed when the policies lead to the pillage and destruction of
local resources by those coming from outside. The indigenous
people of the Amazon have always lived there: the Ainazon is
our home. We know its secrets well, both what it can offer us
and what its limits are. For us, there can be no life if our forests
are destroyed. We want to continue living in our homelands. '

Clear evidence is emerging that, under Indian management,
forests have a better chance of being sustained (Smith, 1987;
but see Redford and Maclean Stearman, 1993). For example,
studies in the highlands of Guatemala have shown that commu-
nal forests under Indian control are better "policed" and are less
overexploited than either individually owned forests, which tend
to be ""cashed-in" for short term personal gains, or municipal
forests, which are either corruptly opened to outside interests or
treated by locals and outsiders alike as "open access" areas.

Even where Indians themselves undertake logging, they pro-
vide examples of far superior management than is the norm in
other parts of Latin America, where forest management is
almost unknown. The Amuesha Indians of the Yanesha
Cooperative in Palcazu in Peru have developed an innovative
shelterbelt logging system that makes maximum use of the
forests — the larger, high quality timbers being processed for
sale on the international market, while smaller poles are chemi-
cally treated and sold locally as fencing posts. Similar projects
have started up in Quintana Roo in Mexico and in the coastal
forests of Ecuador (Anderson 1990; WWF 1991 ).

Timber is far from the only product that Indian communities
are marketing from their forests. Tannins, dyes, oils, honey, wild
fruits, nuts, basketry, artwork, canoes, treecrops and agricultural
produce are among the varied goods that Indian communities are
bringmg to the local and wider markets. Much more needs to be
learned about these community management schemes before

Marching for Territorial Recognition

In 1988, the International Tropical Timber Organisation gave
US$1.26 million to the Government of Bolivia to promote
the sustainable management of the Chimanes forests of the
Beni, part of Bolivia"s Amazon territory. The project formu-
lated by the Bolivian Government and the Washington-based
NGO Conservation International was designed to comple-
ment the management of the Chimanes Biosphere Reserve,
which encloses the El Beni Biological Station, secured under
a dcbt-for-nature svv-ap financed by Conservation
International.

The project, however, was flawed. It made no provisions to
secure the temtorial rights of the Indians, nor did it provide a
real political mechanism for controlling the rampant logging
of mahogany that was already underway in the region.

Indian protests culminated in 1989 with a month-long. 750
kilometre trek to the national capital. La Paz, by thousands of

Indians. The pressure forced the Government lo declare the
whole area of the Chimanes forest as Indian territory and
secured about half the forest as "indigenous areas" for exclu-
sive Indian use. The loggers were supposed to halt the extrac-
tion of timber from these "indigenous areas" and restrict their
cutting to the rest of the territory, which would be finally
restored to the Indians after some 70 years.

However, continued illegal timber extraction from the
"indigenous areas" and accelerating logging in the rest of ter-
ritory obliged the Indians to send delegates to Yokohama to
raise their concerns with the International Tropical Timber
Organisation. The ITTO suspended funding for the project
until new management plans for the now reduced logging
areas were designed and the Indians were brought into the
decision-making process. The Indians have yet to declare
victory, but their position has begun to improve.

Forest Peoples

they can be declared 'sustainable", but the evidence is already
clear that they are far preferable to the destructive short-term
exploitation of outsiders (Counsell and Rice. 1992: Gray. 1991 ).

Governments and development agencies are beginning to get
the message. Already some 200.000 sq. km of Colombia's
Amazonian forests have been redefined as Indian resgiianlos. as
the Government has explicitly recognised the Indians to be the
forests' best guardians (Bunyard. 1989). In Peru. Indian land
demarcation projects are restoring Indian territories through a
patchwork quilt of community tilling programmes, condoned by
Government and assisted by national and international NGOs and
bilateral aid agencies. In Ecuador, pressured by a country-wide
Indian mobilisation, the Government has recognised large
swathes of Indian territory, while retaining rights to petroleum
exploitation. In Brazil, land demarcation processes have again
speeded up. Some 90.000 sq. km of forests have been recognised
as Yanomami Indian lands, while Kayapo areas have been con-
siderably expanded and those of the Tikuna and Xavante
increased slightly (Hosken. 1990). In all. well over 500.000 sq.
km of Amazonian forests are now recognised as Indian lands.

A parallel programme in Brazil is also securing areas of
forests as 'extractive reserves" for rubber tappers. Under this
process forests remain under State ownership, but are leased to
registered rubber tapper cooperatives. The real innovation in
these reserves lies in the wholly new management regimes that
the tappers have instituted; they no longer produce rubber to
pay-off debts to the rubber barons who used to run the trade, but
market it themselves through self-run cooperatives. Even so, the
tappers are finding it hard going as real prices for latex are
abysmally low. Politically, the tappers have united with the
Indians to push for development policies that protect their inter-
ests and they are seeking wider alliances with other non-Indian
groups who also live in the forests — river-dwellers, nut-collec-
tors, fisherfolk and palm-workers (LAB. 1990).

Conservation initiatives are also paying increasing attention to
Indian rights. The Venezuelan Government recently decreed the
whole of the Upper Orinoco, an area inhabited by Yanomami and
Yekuana Indians, a Biosphere Reserve — at over 80,000 sq. km
the world's largest tropical forest conservation zone. The legisla-
tion explicitly recognises Indian use rights throughout the reserve
and promises them a direct role in the management of the area.

Most recently the Inter-American Development Bank, sup-
ported by the World Bank and working with the Spanish
Government and Governments from Latin America, has estab-
lished a special facility — the Fondo Indigena. already capi-
talised with US$40 million — to develop projects in Indian
areas, including land demarcation schemes. An advisory body
for the new Fund will be drawn half from Government and half
from indigenous representatives.

Ki.i\a/>ii laiiiih on iiuclii iiuil iniil. GokiUic. Bnizil.

(WWF/Mauri Rautkari)

Recognition of indigenous rights is now readily admitted
as being socially just, environmentally prudent and necessary
for the sound development of Indian territories. The challenge
for the future is to ensure that external support for these areas
goes to the communities in the forests, that it remains under
local control and that local initiatives are built on (Beauclerk
and Narby. 1988). In the past the Indians have suffered from
externally imposed problems; great sensitivity is now
required to prevent externally imposed solutions doing just as
much harm.

References

Anderson. A.B. (1990). Alternatives to Deforestatioti: steps

toward sustainable use of the Amazon rain forest. Columbia

University Press. New York.
Annis, S. (1987). Cod and Production in a Guatemalan Town.

University of Texas Press, Austin.
Beauclerk, J. and Narby, J. with Townsend. J. (1988). Indigenous

Peoples: afield guide to development. Oxfam. Oxford.
Bodley. J.B. ( 1982). Victims of Progress. Mayfield. Palo Alto.
Branford. S. and Clock. O. (1985). The Last Frontier: Fighting

over land in the Amazon. Zed Books. London.

Brooks. E.. Fuerst. R.. Hemming. J. and Huxley. F. (1973).

Tribes of the Amazon Basin IV72. Report for the Aborigines

Protection Society. Charles Knight and Co.. London.
Bunyard. P. (1989). The Colombian Amazon: policies for the

protection of its indigenous peoples and their environment.

Ecological Press. Bodmin.
Burger. J. (1987). Report from the Frontier: the State of the

World's Indigenous Peoples. Zed Books. London.
Chirif. A., Garcia. P. and Smith. R.C. ( 1991 ). £/ Indigena y Su

Territorio son uno solo: estrategias para la defensa de los

Forest Peoples

pueblos y terrirorios indigenas en la ciienca Amazonica.

COICA and Oxfam (America). Lima.
CEDI (1985). Povos linligenas no Biasil. Ceniro de

Documentacao e Informacao. Sao Paulo. 23 volumes (in

progress).
CEDI/CONAGE. (1988) Empresas de Mineracao e Terras

Indigenas na Amazonia. Centre de Documentacao e

Informacao. Sao Paulo.
CEDI/PETI, (1990). Terras Indigenas no Brasil. Centro de

Documentacao e Informacao. Sao Paulo.
Clad. J. (1984). Conservation and Indigenous Peoples. Cultural

Sunival Quarterly 8(4): 68-73.
Clay. J. ( 1988). Indigenous Peoples and Tropical Forests: mod-
els of Land Use and Management from Latin America.

Cultural Survival, Cambridge, Mass.
Cohen, J.M. (1969). The Four Voyages of Christopher

Columbus. Penguin, Harmondsworth.
Colchester. M. (1981). Ecological Modelling and Indigenous

Systems of Resource Use: some examples from the Amazon

of South Venezuela. Antropologica 55: 5 1-72.
Colchester, M. (1982a). The Economy. Ecology and

Ethnobiology of the Sanema Indians of South Venezuela.

Doctoral Dissertation, University of Oxford.
Colchester, M. (1982b). Amerindian Development: the search

for a viable means of surplus production in Amazonia.

Survival International Review 41/42: 5-16.
Colchester. M. (ed.) (1984). The Health and Survival of the

Venezuelan Yanoama. International Work Group on

Indigenous Affairs, Copenhagen, 1984.
Colchester. M. and Lohmann, L. (eds.) (1992). The Struggle for

Land and the Fate of the Forests. World Rainforest

Movement. Penang. with Zed Books.
Coppens, W. (1983-1989). Los Aborigenes de Venezuela.

3 vols. Fundacion La Salle. Caracas.
Counsell, S. and Rice, T. (eds.) (1992). The Rauiforest HanesI:

Sustainable Strategies for Saving the Tropical Forests?

Friends of the Earth. London.
Davis, S.H. (1977). Victims of the Miracle. Cambridge

University Press. Cambridge.
Davis. S.H. (1988). Land rights and indigenous peoples: the

role of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.

Cultural Survival. Cambridge.
Denevan, W.M. (ed.) (1976). The Native Population of the

Americas in 1492. University of Wisconsin Press. Madison.
Fried. J.L.. Gettleman. M.E., Levenson, D.T. and Peckenham,

N. (1983). Guatemala in Rebellion: Unfinished History.

Grove Press, New York.
Gray, A. (1987). The Amerindians of South America. Minority

Rights Group, London.
Gray, A. (1991). Between the spice of life and the melting pot: bio-
diversity conserxxition and its impact on indigenous peoples.

International Work Group on Indigenous Affairs. Copenhagen.
Hecht, S. and Cockburn, A. (1989). The Fate of the Forest.

Verso, London.
Hemming. J. (1978). Red Gold: the conquest of the Brazilian

Indians. Macmillan. London.
Hemming. J. (1987). Amazon Frontier. The defeat of the

Brazilian Indians. Macmillan, London.
Hicks. J.F., Daly, H.E., Davis, S.H. and de Freitas M.L. (1990).

Ecuador's Amaz.on Region. World Bank. Washington.
Hosken. L. (1990). A Tribute to the Forest People of Brazil.

Gaia Foundation. London.

Johnson, C. Knowles. R. and Colchester. M. (1989).
Rainforests: Land Use Options in Amazonia. Oxford
University Press. Oxford.

LAB (1990). Fight for the Forest: Chico Mendes in his own
Words. Latin America Bureau. London.

Leonel, M. (1992). Roads. Indians and the Environment in the
Amazon: from Central Brazil to the Pacific. International Work
Group on Indigenous Affairs. Copenhagen. Document 72.

Lizot. J. (1986). Tales of the Yanomami. Cambridge University
Press. Cambridge.

Monbiot. G. ( 1991 ). Amazon Watershed. Michael Joseph. London.

Moody, R. (1988). The Indigenous Voice: Vision and Realities.
Volume 1 . Zed Books. London.

Moran, E. (ed.) (1983). The Dilemma of Amazonian
Developmetit. Westview Press, Boulder.

Nelson, R. (ed.) (1977). Popol Vuh: the great mythological
book of the ancient Maya. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston.

Nietschmann. B. (1973). Between Land and Water. Seminar
Press. New York.

Plant. R. (1978). Guatemala: Unnatural Disaster. Latin
America Bureau, London.

Posey. D. (1983). Indigenous ecological knowledge and devel-
opment of the Amazon. In: The Dilemma of Amazonian
Development. Moran, E. (ed.). Westview Press. Boulder.
Pp. 225-257.

Redford. K.H. and Maclean Stearman. A. (1993). Forest-
dwelling native amazonians and the conservation of biodiver-
sity: interests in common or in collision? Conservation
Biology 7 (2): 248-255.

Reichel-Dolmatoff, G. (1976). Cosmology as ecological analy-
sis: a view from the rain forest. Man 1 1(3): 307-318.

Roosevelt, A.C. (1980). Parmana: Prehistoric Manioc and
Maize Cultivation along the Amazon and Orinoco. Academic
Press. New York.

Smith. R.C. (1987). Indigenous autonomy for grassroots devel-
opment. Cultural Sunival Quarterly XI(1 ): 8-12.

Stephen, D. and Wearne. P. (1984). Central America's Indians.
Minority Rights Group. London.

Survival International France (1990). Bresil: Indiens et
Developpement en Amazonie. Ethnies 11-12. Survival
International France. Paris.

Taussig, M. (1987). Shamanism. Colonialism and the Wild
Man: a studv in terror and healing. University of Chicago
Press, Chicago.

Treece, D. (1987). Bound in Miseiy and Iron: the impact of the
Grande Carajas Programme on the Indians of Brazil.
Survival International. London.

UN (1991). Draft Declaration of the Universal Rights of
Indigenous Peoples. United Nations. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1991/40.

Utting, P. (1991). The Social Origins and Impact of
Deforestation in Central America. Discussion Paper, United
Nations Research Institute on Social Development, Geneva.

WWF (1991). Views from the Forest: Natural Forest
Management Initiatives in Latin America. World Wildlife
Fund (USA). Washington DC.

Wilbert. J. (1972). Survivors of El Dorado. Praeger Press, New-
York.

Authors: Marcus Colchester, World Rainforest Movement,
Oxford. U.K and Jeremy Narby, Moudon. Switzerland, with
contributions from John Hemming, Royal Geographical Society
and Steven Hugh-Jones, Cambridge University.

7 Agricultural Colonization
Policies and Deforestation
in Amazonia

Introduction

The Malthusian forces of natural resource destruction by local
people, market-oriented agricultural expansion and the need to
generate foreign exchange were not the major factors behintl the
occupation and deforestation of Amazonia. The real problem
stemmed from growing numbers of landless peasants and small
farmers amving from areas outside Amazonia and the geopoliti-
cal goals and speculative interests of the ruling elites.

The areas from where agricultural colonists arrived were not
excessively populated, but land ownership was concentrated in
a few influential hands. It was this unequal land distribution that
caused problems. Inducing landless workers and peasants to
move into the "empty" Amazonian region offered a means of
avoiding these problems. Additionally, the fear — shared by
most Amazonian countries — that vast uninhabited areas would
tempt foreign occupation, stimulated colonization programmes.
The fact that Amazonia was already inhabited by Amerindians
was either ignored altogether or else concerns about these peo-
ples were subordinated to national developmental and territorial
aspirations.

The occupation of Amazonia and the economic integration of
the region have emphasised the settlement of land by peasants
and landless workers. Large agricultural schemes undertaken by
individual entrepreneurs or corporations have also been encour-
aged. This chapter considers the evolution, since World War II.
of the colonization policies of the main countries sharing the
Amazonian ecosystem. Particular reference is made to Brazil, as
a large portion of Amazonia falls within its boundaries.
Moreover, since 1970. this country has pursued an array of
colonisation policies which have contributed significantly to
large-scale deforestation.

The Limits of Amazonia and its Deforestation

Radically different limits of Amazonia were proposed until the
1950s (Daly and Prance, 1989) and even now estimates of its
size vary between five and six million square kilometres (Sioli,
1984; Pires, 1972), but there is no doubt that most of it lies in
Brazil. Smaller areas occur in Bolivia. Colombia, Ecuador.
Peru. Venezuela and the Guianas. The approximate limits of the
natural boundaries of the area are shown in Figure 7.1. It must

be noted that, in Brazil, this does not correspond with the broader
economic/political boundaries set by the government as
"Amazonia Legal" in 1953 (Oliveira. 1983).

Neither the area nor the rate of deforestation in Amazonia
are well known. Probably best studied is the forest in Brazil
and here it is estimated by Skole and Tucker (1993) that
230,000 sq. km of closed canopy forest (6 per cent) had been
cleared as of 1988, while INPE (1992) estimated about
280,000 sq. km had been cleared in the Legal Amazon at that
time — this, though, included the cerrado vegetation. The esti-
mate increases to 377,600 sq. km if the degraded secondary
forests in Para and Maranhao are included, where "the original
forest was removed in great part many years ago" (INPE,
1992). The figure given by Fearnside in Table 25.5 for defor-
estation in the Brazilian Legal Amazon is very similar to
INPE's larger figure.

In absolute terms. Brazil has certainly lost the greatest area of
Amazonian rain forest, but the losses in Venezuela and
Ecuador, in proportion to the area of Amazonian forest they
contain, have been higher (Schubart, 1991).

Agricultural Colonization in Amazonia

Until the middle ol' this century, most of Amazonia was sparsely
populated. The exploratory incursions, begun centuries ago, had
reduced the Amerindian population considerably, decreasing it
by perhaps as much as 90 per cent. However the extractive
booms (mainly of rubber) of the 19th and early 20th centuries
did attract tens of thousands of migrants to .some areas, such as
western Amazonia. There were attempts to introduce large scale
exploitation of tropical products, such as the Ford rubber planta-
tions set up in Brazil, but most of these failed and were aban-
doned. As a result, until the mid- 1940s, much of this immense
region was inhabited only by native peoples and the colonizers
who had settled some of its more accessible areas. Little devel-
opment or deforestation had taken place.

The 1950s marked the beginning of a complete reversal of
this situation, with considerable influxes of migrants and
attempts to develop Ama/onia as rapidly as possible. Public
policies were fundamental in bringing about these changes.

Agricultural Colonization Policies and Deforestation in Amazonia

Figure 7.1 The limits of Amazonian vegetation

Soiiire: Daly and Prince (1989)

Brazil

Most early deforestation in Brazil resulted from agricultural
expansion outside Amazonia, particularly in the south and
southeast. For instance, before the coffee boom started in the
mid- 18th century. Sao Paulo was 82 per cent forested, but by
1973 only 8.3 per cent of the forest remained. Similarly, at the
end of the 1940s, almost 90 per cent of the northern region of
Parana state was covered in forests. This area is now one of
Brazil's most important agricultural regions and only two per
cent of it remains under forest (Mueller. 1991).

Until the late 1960s, agriculture expanded 'spontaneously'.
The main government action to stimulate the process before that
time was improvement of the transportation system. However,
recent expansion in the Brazilian Amazonia has been greatly
influenced by social policies. These policies reflect an approach
to development in recent decades that has tended to favour city
dwellers and has led to a highly unequal distribution of benefits
(Mueller. 1992). Since 1968. the ruling elites and those with
powerful economic interests have received numerous advan-
tages. Modernisation of agricultural methods, without redistri-
bution of land, has meant that a growing number of people have
been expelled from the main farming areas in the centre-south
of the country. Many of these migrants moved to the large urban
industrial centres, but a considerable number went to the agri-
cultural frontier which had, by then, reached the Amazonian
rain forest. Other people, from the poverty-stricken north-east of
Brazil, joined the migrants from the rural areas of the centre-
south and together they were responsible for a major onslaught
on the Amazonian forests.

Both Brazil's corporate sector and government agencies have
embarked upon major Amazonian ventures. Mining, hydroelec-
tric and industrial investments have all contributed to forest
clearance but large agricultural enterprises and cattle ranches
have been the leading causes of deforestation.

The policies which have directly affected frontier expansion
in Brazilian Amazonia since the mid-1960s have gone through
several distinct phases.

The Early Phase, up to 1965. Policies which sought to inte-
grate Amazonia into the Brazilian economy were attempted prior
to the 1960s, but they had little effect (Mahar. 1978). However,
in the late 195()s. the first major road to link Amazonia to the
centre-south of the country — the Belem-Brasilia highway —
was built. It connected the more dynamic areas of Brazil with the
.southeast margin of the rain forest which later became an impor-
tant agricultural frontier area.

Formation of the Amazonian Strategy ( 1965-1969). The

military regime, which came into power in 1964. drew up a spe-
cific Amazonian strategy. Contrary to current belief, it was
geopolitical considerations, rather than the prospect of exploiting
the region's abundant resources, that motivated this strategy. It
was argued that by establishing a demographic and economic
stronghold in Brazilian Amazonia, and by promoting settlement
of the country's extensive international borders to the north and
west of it. foreign powers would be discouraged from staking
claims there. A frequently voiced motto in the 1970s was. "inte-
grate it or lose it". The main objective of the military regime was.
therefore, to induce rapid occupation of some of Amazonia's
huge "empty spaces", regardless of the economic or environmen-
tal sustainability of the process.

Occupation was based on the hope that it would be possible
to integrate the region into the mainstream of the country's
economy. However, the projects undertaken in the region did
not undergo any form of economic viability analysis. Even for
large investments, cost-benefit analysis was generally not car-
ried out (Torres. 1990). The first major natural resource survey
did not begin until after the projects had started.

Operation Amazonia was launched in 1965 to implement
the new strategy. Its main component was a regional develop-
ment programme based chietly on the provision of tax rebates
and other financial incentives aimed at stimulating private
investment in Amazonia. Most of the investment projects took
the form of huge livestock ranches. Between 1966 and 1969. a
total of 166 livestock enterprises were approved; these made
up over one fifth of all schemes approved as of 1988
(Yokomizo. 1989).

The construction of the Cuiaba-Porto Velho highway began
in 1968. This brought floods of land-hungry settlers, mostly
rural migrants from the centre-south, into the state of Rondonia.

Intensification of the Amazonian Strategy (1970-1975). In

1970. the military government created the National Integration
Programme (PIN) which aimed to boost occupation of
Amazonia by funding road building and settlement projects.
Through this programme, resources were made available to con-
struct some 15.000 kilometres of road and. on either side of
these roads, a 20 km strip of land was reserved for agricultural
settlement projects (Mahar. 1989). At the same time, virtually
all state-owned land was transferred to the federal government,
which thereby acquired control over very large areas. In addi-
tion. PIN increased fiscal incentives for private investment in
Amazonia.

The road construction programme was extremely ambitious.
It was intended that one highway (the Transamazon) would
cross the region from east to west, another (Cuiaba-Santarem)
would cross it from the north to south and a third would be built
along most of the northern boundary of Brazilian Amazonia. In
addition, other trunk roads were to be built or improved to pro-
vide the more developed central-southern regions with access to
strategic portions of Amazonia.

Agricultural Colonization Policies and Deforestation in Amazonia

Only part of the projected road network was actually built.
The Manaus-Porto Velho and Cuiaba-Santarem trunk roads and
the Cuiaba-Porto Velho highway were completed, while the
Transamazon highway was not finished and the border road
never materialised (Figure 7.2). Nonetheless, the roads were
responsible for the opening up of large densely forested areas
for agricultural colonization.

Colonization projects, intended as "model"" settlements, were
set up in two areas of the country. The then federal state of
Rondonia in the north-west of Brazil was one of these.
Settlements here were intended to attract farmers from the south
who were experienced in modern agricultural methods. The
other was along the eastern part of the Transamazon highway.
Here the aim was to settle people from the poverty stricken
norlheasl and thereby alleviate population and social pressures in
that area.

The fiscal incentives were stepped up by PIN so that,
between 1966 and 1972. substantial areas of land were incorpo-
rated into agricultural projects, many involving cattle rearing.
This was partly because of the high prices for beef in the world
market in the early 1970s which led to hopes that Amazonia
would become a world exporter of this commodity.

The intention of PIN was that the settlers would produce sub-
sistence goods and provide manpower for various secondary
developments, while private initiatives, aided by the fiscal
incentives, were to furnish a growing quantity of agricultural
products for both the domestic and export markets. This strategy

aimed to incorporate Amazonia into the national economy and
reduce the danger of foreign domination of the region.

Loss of Impetus and Change in Strategies (1975-1979).

Events did not materialize as expected, howe\er. The oil crises
of the 1970s reduced Brazil's economic growth and made it
more difficult to obtain resources for the road construction pro-
gramme. The high oil prices also accentuated the problems of
having settlements in such remote areas. The road construction
programme for Amazonia was therefore cut back considerably.

This period also witnessed a major change in the strategy for
occupying Amazonia. The public colonization schemes had
proved unsuccessful for a number of reasons. There were seri-
ous administrative problems, inappropriate agricultural tech-
niques were applied by the migrants, and the settlers generally
experienced difficulty in adapting to their new environment. As
a result public colonisation schemes were phased out. Instead,
in order to make the best use of limited governmental resources,
efforts after 1974 focussed on areas with high potential, rather
than on the region in general.

Even though the public colonization schemes had failed, a
much larger flow of spontaneous immigration into parts of east-
ern Amazonia and Rondonia began. The inigrants were small
farmers and workers displaced from the centre-south of Brazil.
This compelled the government to support the orientation and
control of spontaneous colonisation (Martine, 1990; Mueller,
1980). Despite government efforts, the pressure of this migra-

Figure 7.2 Ania/onia: Main Federal Highways and Development Projects

Soiin-,-' M.nh.ir ( l«S«l

Agricultural Colonization Policies and Deforestation in Amazonia

tion was such that the demand for plots in colonization areas far
exceeded supply. As a result, wherever there was road access,
large numbers of migrants settled on public and private land.
The authorities were unable to control the process and this inva-
sion of public land was eventually condoned and legitimised by
the government. In contrast, settlement on private or disputed
land frequently led to violence (Mueller, 1983: Sawyer, 1990).

It was hoped that government-sponsored, private schemes
could replace the public colonisation projects. The government
started providing private ventures and cooperatives with access
to public lands and subsidized credit. These schemes were
intended mainly for settlers from the south of Brazil who had
some capital and farming experience. Most of the projects were
implemented in the north of the state of Mato Grosso, in the rain
forest-savanna transition zone.

Private colonization gained impetus, particularly in the period
from 1976 to 1981. Of the 104 private colonization projects
started between 1970 and 1986. almost 67 per cent were estab-
lished between 1976 and 1981. The total area covered was
29,000 sq. km, of which 68 per cent was setded in 1976-1981.
Most of the farms developed were between one and five sq. km.
The settlers were mainly interested in cultivating commercial
crops and in the 1980s the private colonization areas become an
important producer of soybeans (Mueller, 1990).

The large-scale fiscal incentive projects also fell far short of
original expectations and their number was reduced consider-
ably. Thus from 1973 to 1979, only 56 projects were approved,
coinpared to 3 1 2 projects in the previous seven year period
(Yokomizo, 1989). In addition, new regulations came into force
which prohibited projects in the core of the Amazonian forest
and provided for stricter controls over development in the area.

Nevertheless, some individuals still believed that large
investment projects could suceed in Amazonia and that these
were the key to developing the area. It was during this time that
Daniel Ludwig's huge Jari complex in eastern Amazonia began
to take shape. Over 1000 sq. km of the 15,000 sq. km owned by
Ludwig were cleared and planted with Gmelina arborea and
Pinus carihea. These were to be used as raw material for a large
pulp plant that had been imported from Japan. The scheme
included rice cultivation on 40 sq. km of flood-plain and miner-
als exploitation (Fearnside and Rankin. 1979, 1985). Ludwig
used his own money for these activities, but was encouraged by
the government.

Major Programmes and the Expansion of Fiscal Incentives
(1980-1988). The principal development projects in
Amazonia between 1980 and 1988 were the Northwest Brazil
Integrated Development Programme (POLONOROESTE) in
western Amazonia and the Grande Carajas Programme in east-
em Amazonia (Figure 7.2).

The POLONOROESTE programme, financed by the World
Bank, was an attempt to impose some order on the chaotic occu-
pation of Rondonia and part of western Mato Grosso. A princi-
pal objective of the programme was to reduce forest clearance
on land with little long-term agricultural potential and, instead,
to promote sustainable farming systems based on tree crops
(Mahar, 1989). The programme sought to assist the 30,000 or so
families already settled in the region as well as the 15,000 fami-
lies waiting to be settled there (Mahar 1989). It aimed to reduce
the environmental degradation which was taking place and to
protect Indian populations (World Bank, 1981). However, most
of these goals were not achieved: some people believe that the
government's main objective in seeking loans for

POLONOROESTE was to obtain funds for paving the Cuiaba-
Porto Velho highway (Martine. 1988).

The Grande Carajas Programme began in 1980 as a massive
multisectoral project based on the extraction, transformation and
exportation of the enormous mineral wealth (principally iron
ore) of the Carajas. The numbers of migrants attracted to the
region inevitably caused quite extensive deforestation, particu-
larly outside the concession area. One of the project's most con-
troversial components is the production of pig-iron using char-
coal made from timber from the natural forest. The proposed
pig-iron plants would require 1.2 million tons of charcoal per
year and the wood required for this would result in the clearing
of between 5,400 and 12,(J00 sq. km of forest (Mahar, 1989).
Many billions were invested in this programme, but it is not
now expected to yield a net profit.

As well as developing these two programmes, the govern-
ment also increased its fiscal incentives scheme dramatically
after 1980. Between 1980 and 1986, 353 agricultural projects
were approved. Political pressure from the groups benefiting
from the incentives, rather than the inherent worth of any of the
projects, forced the government to continue the scheme. The
beneficiaries profited both directly from the incentives and sub-
sidies and indirectly from the increased value of their land.
Land prices were driven up by the scheme and by high inflation
which increased the demand for real estate (Binswanger, 1991).
The size of the projects approved after 1980 tended to be smaller
than the earlier ones, and most of them were on the periphery of
the rain forest rather than within it. However, the federal agency
responsible for the scheme became extremely lax in its manage-
ment of the enterprise and incentive monies were frequently
misused (Yokomizo, 1989).

The fiscal incentive scheme for agricultural projects was
reduced in 1987 and temporarily suspended by government
decree in 1989. However, fiscal incentives for regional develop-
ment have been maintained by the 1988 Constitution, and there is
a danger that inappropriate agricultural projects will be resumed
in Amazonia. At present, projects can still be undertaken in the
already degraded or savanna area of Legal Amazonia whereas
those in the core of Amazonia can be resumed only upon comple-
tion of a detailed zoning study, which is cuiTently underway.

This period also saw the failure of the Jari project. In 1982,
having experienced increasing problems with his enterprise,
Ludwig transferred control to a government-backed Brazilian
group (Mueller, 1983).

Summary

Brazil's vast array of measures to encourage colonization have
had very negative impacts on Amazonia. In general, they have
failed to achieve sustainable agricultural and livestock production
or economic development. They have also resulted in vast demo-
graphic shifts, social dislocation, distress for Amazonian Indian
peoples, forest clearance and pervasive environmental disruption.

Colonization in Other Latin American Countries

The Amazonian region of most of the other countries di.scussed
in this chapter are covered with lowland rain forest or. on the
eastern slopes of the Andes, with montane forest. The montane
forest, commonly known as selva alia (upland forest), occurs
from 600 to 3500 m. It covers a smaller proportion of Amazonia
than does lowland forest, but has been the prime target for colo-
nization in the Andean countries. Indeed, in contrast to Brazil,
the Andean lowlands of Bolivia. Colombia. Ecuador, Peru and
Venezuela remain largely untouched (Coomes, 1991 ).

Agricultural Colonization Policies and Deforestation in Amazonia

Bolivia

Bolivia is considered an Andean country, although two-thirds of
its territory is Amazonian. Some of its upland forests were
colonised as long ago as the 16th Century, with attendant exter-
mination, expulsion or absorption of Indian populations by the
in\ading Europeans. Nevertheless, these upland areas were not
intensively exploited until the early 1950s.

In 1952 the Movimiento Nacional Revolutionario (MNR)
seized power and embarked upon a programme of agrarian
reform, nationalization of mines and abolition of feudalism.
However, as Green (1980) notes, the impact of the agrarian
reform legislation on the Amazonian region was not as great as
it might have been since there was little demand for land there.

The MNR also pursued an Amazonia colonization policy, the
main objectives of which were expansion of agricultural pro-
duction, alleviation of demographic pressures in the highlands
and integration of the Bolivian Amazonia into the country's
economy. The construction of a highway, completed in 1954,
which linked La Paz and Cochabamba with the forest city of
Santa Cruz, was an important element of this policy. Between
1954 and 1956. four colonies were founded in this region and
were followed by more modest attempts at colonization of other
high forest areas made accessible by road construction.

Bolivia had frequent changes in its political regime and, con-
sequently, in its administrative policies, but the public colonisa-
tion schemes to resettle landless peasants from the highlands in
Amazonia were maintained. Many landless people migrated to
the Oriente of their own accord. The objectives set by MNR for
the Oriente were gradually achieved and parts of the forest, par-
ticularly the area around Santa Cruz, experienced considerable
economic development. The role of government colonization
schemes in this was minor, though as Stearman (1984) points
out, the schemes used up considerable monetary and human
resources and were a significant feature of Bolivia's develop-
ment plans for many years. Other factors such as the discovery
and exploitation of oil, the establishment of large farms and
ranches, industrialization and, more recently, the cocaine trade
were far more significant for the development of the region. In
addition, international financial support encouraged a tlow of
domestic and foreign settlers to the Amazonian highlands.

Only those colonization programmes involving foreign set-
tlers and international finance had any real success. Public colo-
nization programmes performed poorly (Riviere d'Arc, 1980;
Stearman, 1984). They were undermined by inadequate trans-
portation and marketing, unstable and inefficient administration,
and corruption. In the 1960s the Institulo Nacional de
Colonizacion (National Colonization Institute) was created to
administer the official programmes, but still they did not
improve markedly. However, colonists who abandoned agricul-
ture were an important element in the expansion of other activi-
ties in the Santa Cruz area.

By the mid-1980s, colonization in Bolivia had become largely
spontaneous or semi-directed, with the National Colonization
Institute providing secondary or tertiary roads, technical assis-
tance, water supplies and some .schools (Stearman, 1984).

In Bolivia, unlike other Andean countries, the demographic
and economic results of settlement within Amazonia were con-
siderable. The number of inhabitants is estimated to have
reached 3.7 million in 1990, which is around 51 per cent of the
country's total population. This is a considerable increase from
I960 when only 38 per cent of the population lived in the area
(Butts and Bogue. 1989). The Santa Cruz region has became an
important agricultural centre, generating growing surpluses for

both domestic and export markets. This Amazonia region has
become Bolivia's major area of economic development.

Peru

In Peru, as in Bolivia, the .Spanish conquistadores explored
Amazonia, but failed to colonise it. However, in the 194()s. pop-
ulation increases in the country's coastal and highland areas and
unequal land distribution led to urban saturation, food deficits
and political unrest and these stimulated rural exodus. Political
elites opposed land redistribution, and as new roads made the
Peruvian Amazonia accessible, landless peasants from the
Sierras moved in.

It was not until the I96()s that a concerted colonization policy
was established. Peasants had been settled previously in
Amazonia but had not been sponsored by the government. In
1954, for instance, le Tourneau, an American millionaire,
obtained 4000 sq. km of Peruvian Amazonia for a colonization
project. In spite of large expenditure, this failed and was aban-
doned. The government granted land to companies constructing
roads in the upland forest, and to their employees, for sale to
colonists from the Andes (Chirif, 1980).

It was during the first mandate of President Belaunde Terry
that a strategy for settlement and development in Amazonia was
introduced; access roads were to be constructed and coloniza-
tion projects promoted. A highway, the Carretera Marginal de la
Selva, was to be built along the eastern flank of the Andes with
other new roads leading from it. Belaunde Terry hoped that by
linking the Venezuelan-Colombian border with southeast
Bolivia, through the Ecuadorian and Peruvian forests, the
Carretera Marginal would facilitate the development and eco-
nomic integration of the Amazonian region of all the Andean
countries. In the event, only the Peruvian sector of the road was
constructed. A large colonisation project, financed by a LIS$4I
million loan from the Interamerican Development Bank (IDB),
was started in 1966 in the Huallaga Valley. Two other smaller
projects were also attempted (Schuurman, 1980). However, all
three ran into difficulties and were phased out.

In the 1960s and early 1970s, both government-sponsored
and. more importantly, spontaneous colonization resulted in the
settlement of eleven important river basins on the eastern slopes
of the Andes (Arambinu, 1984). Spontaneous colonization by
landless peasants and entrepreneurs, the latter interested in cat-
tle ranching and commercial agriculture, brought people from
the highlands and coastal areas. Large numbers of Indians were

Charcoal making from iiuiliogany, used to smelt iron ore from
Carajds. Ama:inua, Brazil- (\\ \V17M;irk f'dwards)

Agricultural Colonization Policies and Deforestation in Amazonia

pushed off their land during this process. Some moved to
remote lowland areas and others were assimilated by the new
communities and exploited as labourers.

A military coup in 1968 changed the Amazonian strategy.
Colonization was downplayed, an Indian rights policy was
established and there was a short-lived attempt to deal directly
with the agrarian problems in the coastal and highland areas.
However, changes within the military leadership and the re-
election of Belaunde Terry in 1980 meant that the Amazonian
development strategy was resurrected. Assistance programmes
for the region's settlers were established and colonization
schemes were revived with American aid. Between 1981 and
1985, USAID allocated US$167 million for this purpose, but
with disappointing results (Aramburu and Garland. 1986).
There were also incentives for settlers to move north to consoli-
date the disputed border with Ecuador (Stocks. 1984).

In the 1970s, the Peruvian Oriente experienced an oil boom.
Exploration companies moved into parts of the region, creating
temporary employment, but also generating substantial social
dislocation. When the boom ended, uneinployment became a
serious problem for some areas.

More recently, there has been a sharp increase in the illegal
cultivation of coca, creating a problem of almost unmanageable
proportions. The United States pushed for eradication of this
crop, but the wisdom of their pouring abundant foreign aid into
areas already settled, but of low agricultural potential, is now
being questioned (Aramburu, 1984). The results of the aid for
colonisation were poor and both state and foreign aid has now
been phased out. Further problems in many of these areas have
been created by the presence of the Sendero Luminoso (Shining
Path) guerilla group.

In 1978 a decree annulled the law recognizing the rights of
Amazonian indigenous communities. It also introduced a con-
cessions system for the exploitation of national forest reserves,
which had previously been controlled by the state (Chirif,
1980). The decree established safeguards to protect forests, but
legislation of the Belaunde Terry government has since elimi-
nated most of them and made it much easier for national and
foreign companies to gain access to reserve lands. According to
Stocks (1984). as much as 90 per cent of national forests in
some areas have been given in concessions to the private sector.
In addition, the Amazonian strategy of the 1980s provided gen-
erous incentives for entrepreneurs willing to inxest in the
region's remoter areas.

Spontaneous colonization and entrepreneurial activity were
responsible for a considerable increase in the number of occupants
of Peruvian Amazonia; they grew from little more than 400,000 in
1940 to over 1.8 million in 1981. This is an increase from 6.7 per
cent to 10.6 per cent of the country's total population living in
Amazonia. The upland forests have absorbed most of this popula-
tion increase but there has also been an inflow of migrants into
other parts of the Peruvian Amazonia. However, transportation
and other difficulties have meant that the rate of growth in these
areas has been lower than that occurring in upland forest areas
(Aramburu. 1984). while migration into the coastal areas, especially
into large cities, has been most significant.

Ecuador

Official support for the settlement of Ecuadorian Amazonia is a
fairly recent phenomenon. As a result of the 1941 war between
Ecuador and Peru over petroleum. Ecuador lost part of its
Amazonian territory. It. therefore, came to view colonization of
the remainder and its integration into the national economy as

matters of considerable urgency. Military po.sts and colonization
projects were established, regardless of economic considera-
tions. The aim was simply to gain control of the country's bor-
ders (Bromley, 1980: Uquillas, 1984).

Spontaneous population movements in Ecuador began to
gain pace in the late 1940s. The migrants were from the more
densely populated areas in the Andean highlands and from the
coast; they moved because of overcrowding and land pressures
in those areas. They were attracted to Amazonia by the prospect
of jobs and the availability of land.

The oil boom which began in parts of Amazonia in the late
1940s was an added factor. Roads to oil areas facilitated migra-
tion, which was spurred on by the employment opportunities in
both the oil and timber industries. Land was available and agri-
cultural products were required by the people working in the
area. Entrepreneurs saw opportunities for cattle-ranching and
the production of crops such as coffee.

The government favoured spontaneous colonization and also
created several official colonization projects. By 1981 there
were seven of these official schemes in Ecuadorian Amazonia.
They were located in the provinces of Napo (the main oil area).
Morona-Santiago and Zamora-Chinchipe (near the Peruvian
border). Gradually, settlements were consolidated throughout
the high forest and in the intermontane valleys. The majority
were dedicated to farming and ranching (Uquillas. 1984).
Initially, the official colonization projects were intended to
attract people to "empty" areas, but later they became attempts
to control the rapid spontaneous occupation.

Costs associated with the settlement of the Ecuadorian
Amazonia included the usual social dislocation of frontier areas,
environmental problems and the displacement of Indian com-
munities, who were forced to find land elsewhere. However,
only a relatively small area of Amazonia was affected by colo-
nization. One of the main reasons for this was the region's poor
transportation system. There were plans to construct more high-
ways, and even railroads, but these were never realized. In 1976
there were only four relatively short penetration roads, either
associated with oil exploration or constructed for strategic rea-
sons (Bromley, 1980). The result was a comparatively minor
increase in the region's population, from 1.6 per cent of the
country's total in 1960. to 3.0 per cent in 1980 and still only 4.2
per cent in 1990. Of the 460.000 people inhabiting the region in
1990. 76.1 per cent lived in the forested provinces of Napo and
Morona-Santiago (Butts and Bogue, 1989).

Colombia

The Colombian Amazonia was explored several centuries ago,
but was only recently settled by non-Indians. Here, as in other
countries of the region, population pressure in the uplands stim-
ulated its settlement. However, two events led the government
to intervene decisively in the process. The first was during the
1930s and 1940s, when Colombia and Peru were laying claim to
the same territory and tensions ran high. As a result, the govern-
ment built a road into strategic areas near the Colombian-
Peruvian border and introduced incentives to encourage settlers
to move into parts of the provinces of Putumayo and Caqueta
(Carrizosa. 1983). The second event was the insurrection and
conflict (the Violencia) which erupted in 1948. When a truce
was finally reached in 1953. it was decided that peasants who
had lost their land, and other victims of the Violencia, should be
settled on public lands in Amazonia.

The settlement process was stepped up in the 1960s. After the
meeting of the Organization of American States (OAS) in Punta

Agricultural Colonization Policies and Deforestation in Amazonia

del Este in 1960, foreign aid was sought and the Instituto
Colombiano de la Reforma Agraiia (INCORA) ciealed to man-
age colonization of Amazonia (Dominguez. 1984). The OAS
meeting had recommended strong commitment to agrarian
reform in Latin America, but Colombia, together with most other
countries in the region, decided that politically it was easier lo
settle landless peasants in the "empty" spaces of Amazonia.

The results of the public and private colonisation schemes
that took place in the 1950s and 1960s, in the forests of the
provinces of Putumayo and Caqueta and, later in the province of
Guaviare. were generally poor. Reasons for this included bad
planning, inefficient administration, malaria outbreaks and lack
of support for the settlers. Many people moved back to the high-
lands or set-off in search of less hostile areas elsewhere in
Amazonia (Ortiz, 1984). The scheme in Caqueta seems to have
been an exception. There the colonization project attained such
a high growth rate that it prompted INCORA to concentrate
most of its resources in this region and use it as a model of
agrarian reform (Dominguez, 1984).

The discovery of petroleum in the late 1960s led to the
improvement of the transportation system, generated jobs and
markets for agricultural products and encouraged spontaneous
migration into Putumayo. Caqueta also attracted wealthier set-
tlers and farmers drawn by the province's improved conditions
and the availability of land which was not only cheap, but had
been cleared by previous settlers (Ortiz, 1984). In this way,
large landholdings were created in the high forest zone in the
two regions. Urban centres and heterogeneous agricultural sec-
tors, producing both subsistence and market orienled goods,
also developed in both provinces.

As in other Latin American countries, the first- and second-
generation settlers took over land previously used by Indian
peoples. The latter moved to other areas of Amazonia, or
became acculturated. joining the poorest migrants as a source of
cheap labour.

Difficulties of access and the inhospitable nature of Colombian
Amazonia have restricted colonization to a limited geographical
area and its impact has accordingly been fairly small. Similarly,
the region's contribution to the national economy remains meagre
and its population increase insignificant. It is estimated that by
1990, the number of people in Colombian Ainazonia was a mere
533,000, or 1.7 per cent of the country's total population. The
provinces of Caqueta and Putumayo hold 76. 1 per cent of the peo-
ple living in Amazonia, while Guaviare contains another 10 per
cent of the area's inhabitants. Although the other three provinces
in the region are very extensive, they have only small populations.

Venezuela

Venezuela's Amazonian region is mostly within the Territorio
Federal do Amazonas situated in the southern tip of the country.
The state of Bolivar, to the south of the Orinoco, includes a rela-
tively small portion of Amazonia (Butts and Bogue, 1989:
Esteves, 1986). but this area is not included in the following dis-
cussion.

The Federal Territory of Amazonia covers 178.000 sq. km, or
20 per cent of Venezuela, but its estimated population in 1990
was only 83,000 (Butts and Bogue, 1989). Nevertheless, this is a
large increase from I960 when there were a mere 11,000, or
thereabouts, people in the area (Butts and Bogue, 1989). One of
the Territory's most striking characteristics is its isolation from
the more developed parts of the country. No major roads have
been constructed and the extensive river network still constitutes
the main transportation system (Esteves. 1986).

Around 30 per cent of the tropical forest originally covering
Venezuela was in the Territory, with most of the remainder in
Bolivar. Although a considerable area of forest has been
cleared, only a very small proportion of this has been from the
Territory. This is because colonization in the region has been
negligible. However, this does mean that its rain forest is not
under pressure. To some extent, Venezuela is at the stage the
other Andean countries were at forty years ago. Although pros-
perity was created by petroleum until the late 1970s, its influ-
ence, in terms of increased economic activities and a rise in
population, was restricted almost exclusively to the area north
of 6 latitude (Benacchio. 1982). When the revenue from oil
declined in the 1980s. Venezuela was compelled to search for
new avenues of development, and occupation of Amazonia was
one possibility. In addition, settlement of this area was advocated
as a means of protecting the immense "empty" areas to the
south of the country from the expansionist ambitions of
Venezuela's neighbours.

Expansion into Amazonia has had a major impact on the
Indian communities in the region. Expropriation of the Indians'
land began in the early colonial period, but it was not until the
late 1950s that this occurred in Amazonia. Initially, the process
was slow, but according to Arvelo-Jimenez (1984, 1986) it
speeded up dramatically and many Indian communities lost land
they had occupied for generations. The reasons for this change,
which can be traced back to the late 1960s, were the real or sup-
posed geopolitical strategies of Venezuela's neighbours. These
aroused nationalistic feelings and made the country's military
forces uneasy. This led to the inception of the "Conquista del
Sur" (Conquest of the South), a strategy for the development
and integration of Amazonia into the country's economy, which
received strong backing from the corporate sector. As well as
proposing settlement and development of the region, it envi-
sioned the "civilization" of the Indians. It was claimed that, in
their primitive state, the Indians held no allegiance to Venezuela
and were potential pawns of foreign interests. They should,
therefore, be acculturated and incorporated into the national
society. Arguments such as these provided an excuse for land
grabbing, but by corporations rather than landless peasants.

The Venezuelan Amazonian debate features two opposed
groups: the developers, armed with arguments such as those out-
lined above, and the Indian Rights movement, which argues
against measures which destroy the identity of the Indians and/or
expropriate their land. Until the early 1970s the former prevailed,
but since then the influence of the Indian Rights movement has
increa.sed markedly. Legislation which favours the interests of the
Indians has been passed and extensive areas of forest have been
allocated for conservation and traditional use. However, these
actions have been strongly criticized by the developers on the
grounds that they risk endangering national security.

The economic crisis of the 1980s lent further support to argu-
ments for developing Amazonia and gave added impetus to
groups keen to see an Amazonian geopolitical strategy imple-
mented. These groups were at one with vociferous politicians
and segments of the media who pointed to the supposed inherent
danger in the nomadic behaviour of the Amazonian Indians and
the neglected state of Venezuela's southern international borders.
It was claiined that, with the aid of more modern agricultural
techniques, the Indians would be able to subsist in much smaller
areas of land and live in permanent settlements. This 'reorgani-
zation' would then make extensive areas available for develop-
ment and enable the corporate sector to exploit any minerals or
other resources in the "freed" land (Arvelo-Jimenez, 1986).

Agricultural Colonization Policies and Deforestation in Amazonia

Venezuela's Amazonian frontier is still not opened and set-
tled, but the belief that it should be is gaining increasing accep-
tance in Venezuela. Nationalistic feelings are stronger than ever,
particularly as the discovery of alluvial gold has brought a flood
of Brazilian gold-diggers into the Venezuelan Amazonia.
Events such as this highlight the danger that the regulations pro-
tecting both the environment and the interests of Indian commu-
nities will be abandoned. Instead, roads will be opened and the
landless and poor induced to move into Amazonia as has hap-
pened in the other Latin American countries. A major factor
preventing this to date is the Territory's dense river network,
which makes road construction there an arduous and very
expensive task (Esteves. 1986).

Conclusions

There are common elements in the colonization experiences of
all the countries reviewed above. In most, the land holding class
of the old, settled areas has successfully resisted attempts to
carry out land reform by persuading governments to direct the
peasants and landless workers to the "empty" Amazonian
region. Typically, geopolitical considerations have played a
central role in defining strategies for Amazonia. In addition, the
discovery of petroleum in Amazonia, with its knock-on effects

on transportation systems, job and market creation and
increased settlement, has been a important factor. The corporate
sector has also had a significant influence on policies concerned
with development of Amazonia.

The effects of the strategies and the colonization policies of
the different countries also exhibit common features. Relative to
the total area of Amazonia in each country, the land areas
affected by settlers and agricultural ventures are not large.
Similarly, except in Bolivia, the population increase due to the
colonization of Amazonia has not been great. Much the same
can be said of the contribution the schemes have made to the
economies of the countries concerned. The difficulty of access
to the rain forest, which renders economic exploitation problem-
atic, has in itself moderated the impact of human activities.
Nevertheless considerable resources have been poured into col-
onization schemes in all countries except Venezuela, with gen-
erally very poor results. Moreover, there has been senseless
destruction of tropical forests and native populations have suf-
fered violence and expropriation of their land.

The conclusion, for both Brazil and the Andean countries, is
that the colonization schemes have caused enormous economic,
social and environmental problems and have yielded only mod-
est benefits.

References

Aramburij, C.E. (1984). Expansion of the agrarian and demo-
graphic frontier in the Peruvian selva. In: Frontier Expansion in
Amazonia. Schmink, M. and Wood, C.H. (eds), pp. 153-230.
University of Florida Press, Gainesville, Florida, U.S.A.

Aramburij. C.E. and Garland, E.B. (1986). Poblamiento y uso
de los recursos en la Amazonia Alta: el caso del Alto
Huallaga. In: Desarollo Amazonico: Una Perspectiva
Lationamericana. Aramburu, C.E. and Mora, C. (eds),
pp. 115-177. CIPA-INANDEP, Lima. Peru.

Arvelo- Jimenez, N. (1984). The politics of cultural survival in
Venezuela: beyond indigenismo. In: Frontier Expansion in
Amazonia. Schmink, M. and Wood, C.H. (eds). pp. 105-126.
University of Florida Press, Gainesville, Florida.

Arvello-Jimenez, N. (1986). Se dice que son contradictorios . . .
los indigenas y la securidad nacional. In: Desarollo Amazonico:
una Perspectiv Lationamericatia. Aramburu, C.E. and Mora, C.
(eds), pp. 391-423. CIPA-LNANDEP. Lima, Peru.

Benacchio, S. (1982). Agricutural development in Venezuela's
Amazon region. In: Amazonia — Agriculture and Land Use
Research. Hecht, S. (ed.), pp. 115-134. Centro Internacional
de Agricultura Tropical, Call, Colombia.

Binswanger, H.P. ( 1991 ). Brazilian policies that encourage defor-
estation in the Amazon. World Development 19 (7): 821-29.

Bromley, R. (1980). The role of tropical colonization in the
twentieth century economic development of Ecuador. In:
Land. People and Planning in Contemporary Amazonia.
Barbira-Scazzochio, F. (ed.), pp. 174-184. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, U.K.

Butts, Y. and Bogue. D.J. ( 1989). Inrernatioiuil Amazonia — Its
Human Side. Social Development Center, Chicago, U.S.A.

Carrizosa, J. ( 1983). La ampliacion de la frontera agricola en el
Caqueta (Amazonia Colombiana). In: Expansion de la
Frontera Agropecudria y Medio Ambiente en America
Latina. ECLA/UNEP (eds). pp. 237-310. UN/CIFCA,
Madrid, Spain.

Chirif, A. (1980). Internal colonialism in a colonised country:

the Peruvian Amazon in a historical perspective. In: Land,
People and Planning in Contemporary Amazonia.
Barbira-Scazzocchio, F. (ed.), pp. 185-192. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, U.K.

Coomes, O.T. (1991). Rain Forest Extraction. Agroforestry.
and Biodiversity Loss: an Environmental History from the
Northeastern Peruvian Amazon. Proceedings of the XVI
International Congress of the Latin American Studies
Association, April 6, 1991, Washington, D.C., 28 pp.

Daly, D.C. and Prance, G.T. (1989). Brazilian Amazon. In:
Floristic Inventory of Tropical Countries: the status of plant
svstematics. collections, and vegetation, plus recommendations
for the future. Campbell, D.G. and Hammond, H.D. (eds).
Pp. 401^26. The New York Botanical Garden, New York.

Dominguez, C.A. (1984). National expansion and development
policies in the Colombian Amazon. In: Frontier E.xpansion in
Amazonia. Schmink, M. and Wood. C.H. (eds). pp. 405-18.
University of Florida Press. Gainesville, Florida, U.S.A.

Esteves, J. (1986). Manejo ambiental de los recursos: plan de la
Amazonia Venezoelana. In: Desarollo Amazonico: Una
Perspectiva Latinoamericcma. Aramburu. C.E. and Mora, C.
(eds). pp. 21-57. CIPA-INANDEP. Lima. Peru.

Fearnside, P.M. and Rankin, J. (1979). Avalia^ao da Jari
Florestal e Agropecudria Ltda. como modelo para o desen-
volvimento da Amazonia. Acta Amazonico 9 (3): 609-616.

Fearnside, P.M. and Rankin, J. (1985). Jari revisted: changes
and the outlook for sustainability in Amazonia's largest silvi-
cultural estate. /»rcrc-/f/ic/fl 10(3): 121-129, 160.

Fearnside, P.M., Tardin, A.T. and and Meira, L.G.M. (1990).
Deforestation rate in Brazilian Amazonia. National
Secretariat of Science and Technology, Brasilia, Brazil.

Green, M. (1980). The development of the Bolivian Oriente
since 1950 and the ^Junkers' transition to capitalism in
Bolivian agriculture. In: Land. People and Planning in
Contemporarv Amazonia. Barbira-Scazzocchio, F. (ed.). Pp.
171-173. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.

Agricultural Colonization Policies and Deforestation in Amazonia

INPE (1992). Deforestation in Brazilian Amazon. Institute
Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciaias, S3o Jose dos Campos.
Brazil.

Mahar, D. (1978). Poh'ticas de desenvolvimento para a Amazonia:
passado e presente. In: Dimensoes do Desenvolvimento
Brasileiro. Baer, W., Geiger, P.P. and Haddad. P.R. (eds.).
Editora Campus Ltda. Rio de Janeiro. Brazil.

Mahar. D.J. (1989). Government Policies anil Deforestation in
Brazil's Amazon Region. The World Bank, Washington. D.C.

Martina. G. (1988). Frontier expansion, agricultural moderniza-
tion and population trends in Brazil. In: Population. Food
and Rural Development. Lee. R.D.. Arthur. W.B.. Kelly.
A.C., Srinivasan, G. and Rogers. T.N. (eds). Pp. 187-203.
Clarendon Press. Oxford. U.K.

Martine. G. (1990). Rondonia and the fate of small producers.
In: The Future of Amazonia — Destruction or Sustainable
Development. Goodman. D. and Hall. A. (eds). pp. 23 — 18.
Macmillan. London. LI.K.

Mueller, C. (1980). Frontier based agricultural expansion: the
case of Rondonia. In: Land. People and Planning in
Contemporary Amazonia. Barbira-Scazzocchio. F. (ed.).
pp. 141-153. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. U.K.

Mueller. C. ( 1983). El estado y la expansion de la frontera agri-
cola en la Amazonia. In: Expansion de la Frontera
Agropecuaria y Medio Ambiente en America Latina.
ECLA/UNEP (eds). pp. 37-78. UN/CIFCA. Madrid. Spain.

Mueller, C. (1990). Poh'ticas govemamentais e expansao recente
da agropecuaria no Centro Oete. Planejamento e Poh'ticas
Piiblicas. Brasilia, 3: 45-73.

Mueller, C. (1991). Dindmica. Condicionantes e Impactos
Socio-ambientais da Evolu^do da Fronteira Agri'cola no
Brasil. Working Document No. 7. Institute for the Study of
Society. Population and Nature, Brasilia. 29 pp.

Mueller, C. (1992). Agriculture, Urban Bias and the
Environment. Paper presented at the conference on Natural
Resources and Environment Manageinent in an
Interdependent World. January 22-24, 1992. Costa Rica.

Oliveira. A.E. de (1983). Ocupagao humana. In: Amazonia:
desenvolvimento, integrai;do. e ecologia. Salati, E., Schubart,
H.O.R.. Junk, W, and Oliveira, A.E. de (eds). Editora
Brasiliense/CNPq. Sao Paulo.

Ortiz, S. (1984). Colonization in the Colombian Amazon. In:
Frontier Expansion in Amazonia. Schmink. M. and Wood.
C.H. (eds). pp. 204-230. University of Florida Press.
Gainesville. Florida. U.S.A.

Pires. J.M. ( 1972). Tipos de vegetaijao de Amazonia. Publicacoes
Avulsas Museii Paraense Emilio Goeldi 20: 1 79-202.

Riviere d'Arc, H. (1980). Public and private agricultural poli-
cies in Santa Cruz (Bolivia). In: Land, People and Planning
in Contemporary Amazon. Barbira-Scazzocchio. F. (ed.).
pp. 15-1—161. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. U.K.

Sawyer. D. (1990). The future of deforestation in Amazonia: a
socioeconomic and political analysis. In: Alternatives to
Deforestation — Steps Towards Sustainable use of the
Amazon Rain Forest. Andernson (ed.). pp. 265-274.
Columbia University Press, New York. U.S.A.

Schubart. H.O.R. (1991). A Amazonia e os Temas Ecologicos
Globais — Mitos e Realidade. Working Document no. 6.
Institute for the Study of Society. Population and Nature
(ISPN). Brasflia. 24 pp.

Schuurman. F. (1980). Colonization policy and peasant econ-
omy in the Amazon Basin. In: Land, People and Planning in
Contemporary Amazonia. Barbira-Scazzocchio. F. (ed.),
pp. I06-1 13. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.

Sioli. H. (1984). The Amazon and its main affluents: hydrogra-
phy, morphology of the river courses, and river types. In: The
Amazon. Limnology and Landscape Ecology of a Mighty
Tropical River. Sioli. H. (ed). Dr W. Junk. Dordrecht.

Skole, D. and Tucker. C. (1993). Tropical deforestation and
habitat fragmentation in the Amazon: satellite data from
1978 to 1988. Science 260: 1905-I9I0.

Stearman. A.M. (1984). Colonization in Santa Cruz. Bolivia: a
comparative study of the Yapacani and San Julian Projects.
In: Frontier Expansion in Amazonia. Schmink. M. and
Wood. C.H. (eds). pp. 231-260. University of Florida Press.
Gainesville. Florida. U.S.A.

Stocks, A. (1984). Indian policy in Eastern Peru. In: Frontier
Expansion in Amazonia. Schmink, M. and Wood. C.H. (eds).
pp. 33-61. University of Florida Press. Gainesville. Florida.
U.S.A.

Torres, H.G. (1990). A experiencia de planejamento e desen-
volvimento regional da Amazonia. In: O Aproveitamento
Integrado das Principals Bacias Hidrogrdficas da Amazonia
como Estrategia Espacial de Desenvolvimento Regional.
SUDAM/OAS, Belem. (Mimeograph).

Uquillas, J. ( 1984). Colonization and Spontaneous Settlement in
the Ecuadorian Amazon. In: Frontier Expansion in
Amazonia. Schmink. M. and Wood. C.H. (eds). pp. 261-284.
University of Florida Press, Gainesville, Florida, U.S.A.

World Bank, (1981). Brazil. Integrated Development of the
Northwest Frontier. The World Bank. Washington. D.C
U.S.A.

Yokomizo. C. (1989). Incenlivos Financeiros e Fiscais na
Pecuarizagdo da Amazonia. Texto para Discussao No. 22.
IPEA/IPLAN. Brasflia. 30 pp.

Author: Charles C. Mueller. University of Illinois, with contri-
butions from David Cleary. Cambridge University; Michael
Eden. Royal Holloway and Bedford College and Nigel Sizer.
World Resources Institute.

8 Protected Areas

Introduction

As forest loss in the Americas accelerates and its economic and
social consequences are increasingly felt, protected areas (or as
often referred to in this atlas, conservation areas) have assumed
greater importance as a means to conserve viable, representative
portions of intact forest and other ecosystems. The process has
taken different forms in different countries and to generalise
across the Neotropics is difficult given the great diversity of
countries and the variety of forces which have influenced pro-
tected area creation and management. Yet within this context of
diversity, which makes it imperative to consider each country
individually, there are also important common factors — similar
socioeconomic conditions, for example — which have forged
the protected area systems we see today.

Although there has been a large increase in the number and
extent of protected areas over the last decade (see Figure 8.1),
the success of those in the Americas has been rather mixed. The
great majority of parks and reserves are subject to encroachment,
poaching and similar threats. Conflicts between local communi-
ties and national or global interests have been solved in only a
very few cases, and with increasing population these conflicts
will intensify. More effective means are required for linking pro-
tected areas with national development, territorial planning and,
at the most fundamental level, the needs of humans. It is in this
field that Neotropical protected area managers are learning most
and within which there will be exciting developments in the
future. This chapter presents a history of protected areas in tropi-
cal America, examines the current situation and analyses the
issues confronting protected area managers.

History of Protected Areas in tlie Americas

Protection of natural areas as we conceive it today is a recent
phenomenon in the Americas. Of course, there are notable
exceptions: the Aztecs maintained botanical gardens, those con-
structed and cared for by the sovereigns NetzahualcoyotI and
Moctezuma being amongst the most well known (Alcerreca et
al.. 1988). The Maya on the other hand developed a very effi-
cient and complex shifting agricultural system based on silvicul-
ture. They made extensive use of terraces and designed irriga-
tion systems to supply raised fields. They also managed and
protected "natural" forest blocks in order to speed reforestation
of their fallow plots, a system which can still be seen today in
the rich and diverse forest gardens of the present day Maya
(Gomez-Pompa, 1991).

It is important to understand the history of Neotropical
forests and the processes responsible for their present day com-
position and distribution in order to set conservation criteria
(McNeely, 1993). Before the arrival of the Europeans in 1492,

there are thought to have been about 30 million people living in
the tropical forests of the Americas (see Chapter 6 — but note
that there is debate about these figures). Many were hunter-
gatherers, but agriculture was also widespread. The large popu-
lations living in the forests had profound effects upon the eco-
logical processes, species composition and structure of the for-
est itself. Ama.'onia's eight million inhabitants, like the Kayapo
in Brazil of today, were collecting and cultivating food plants
such as tubers and beans as well as managing the densities and
distributions of useful tree species (Posey, 1982). In Central
America, 75 per cent of the Yucatan forest had been modified
by A.D. 800. However, with the collapse of the Maya civilisa-
tion, the forests in the central lowlands had largely recovered
when the Spaniards arrived 700 years later. Nevertheless, when
the first European settlers arrived, far from encountering a "pris-
tine" environment, they found a landscape which had been pro-
foundly altered by man (McNeely, 1993).

The European colonists, bringing diseases and forced labour
with them, caused a severe reduction in the indigenous popula-
tion: 75 per cent of the native people of the Americas south of
present-day USA are thought to have been eliminated between
1492 and 1650 (Denevan, 1992). This demographic collapse was
not compensated for until the recent immigration of settlers, and
it left large areas of agricultural land to revert to forest once more.

The conquest also modified traditional resource management
systems or replaced them with non-sustainable, export-oriented
ones (Alcerreca er al.. 1988; Perez-Gil and Jaramillo, 1992). In
response to environmental degradation, the first protected areas
were established: Tobago's Main Ridge Reserve and St.
Vincent's King's Hill Reserve were declared in 1765 and I79I
respectively, both to protect watersheds (Putney, 1992). A cen-
tury passed before the first true protected area, Mexico's
Desierto de los Leones Forest Reserve, was established in
Middle America, and not until the start of the 19th Century did
the first ones appear in South America (Torres, 1992; Ugalde
andGodoy. 1992).

In 1872. Yellowstone in the United States was declared the
world's first national park. The first Neotropical national parks
were a product of the efforts of particular individuals, such as
Francisco CPerito') Moreno in Argentina and Henri Pittier in
Venezuela (Amend and Amend, 1992a), Parque Nacional del
Sur (now called Nahuel Huapi) in Argentina, set up in 1903,
was the first national park to be declared in South America. It
was followed by Uruguay's F.D. Roosevelt in 1916, Chile's
Vicente Perez Rosales in 1926, Kaietur in Guyana in 1929 and
Pico Cristal National Park in Cuba in 1930 (Oltremari, 1992;
Putney, 1992; Torres, 1992). Barro Colorado Biological

Protected Areas

1200

KKX)

800

600

400

200

Number of sites

Area(x 1000 sq. km)
I — I

1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990

1905 1915 1925 1935 1945 1955 1965 1975 1985

Five year period beginning . . .

Figure 8.1 Growth of tlie protected areas network in the

Americas Source; WCMC. unpublished data

Reser\e in Panama, the Islas Galapagos National Park in
Ecuador and Henri Pittier National Park in Venezuela were all
established durmg the 1920s and 1930s.

To begin with, protected areas were declared by the enact-
ment of legislation specific to each site. Brazils Royal Charter
of 1797 was the first general' legislation to protect forests. The
first Forest Laws providing for the creation of protected areas
appeared in 1905 (Amend and Amend. 1992b: Ugalde and
Godoy. 1992: lUCN. 1992). Management was usually assigned
to either forest or agriculture departments. However, in some
countries in the absence of more appropriate agencies, this fell,
for example, on the Central Bank in Nicaragua and on the
Institute of Tourism in El Salvador. Protection of natural areas
was often associated with laws on agrarian reform, as both were
linked to a rational territorial planning process. Indeed, the most
successful reformers were often the best conservers. For exam-
ple, in Mexico President Lazaro Cardenas, famous for his land
reform programmes, established 58 per cent of the current pro-
tected areas system and made major improvements in natural
resource management during his term of office from 19.^4 to
1940(Alcerrecae/fl/.. 1988).

Protected areas continued to be created throughout the first
half of this century, mainly as a means of safeguarding water-
sheds, outstanding natural landscapes and areas for tourism. In
Central America, many were declared to preserve the region's
impressive Precolumbian heritage. These included Tikal
National Park in Guatemala, which protects the remains of the
largest Mayan city in Mesoamerica. Ruinas de Copan Cultural
Monument in Honduras, and numerous areas on the Yucatan
Peninsula in Mexico. However, there was no clear concept of
how a national park should be managed: each country followed
a different philosophy according to its historical, social and geo-
graphical background. Efforts to unify philosophy and practice
began through international agreements in the 1930s. The 1940
Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife Preservation in
the Western Hemisphere (Western Hemisphere Convention) did
much to encourage and direct protected area legislation through-
out the Americas. By the 1960s, all of the South and Central
American nations had declared protected areas of some sort
(Torres, 1992: Ugalde and Godoy. 1992).

In the 1970s, environmental concern on a world scale stimu-
lated the appearance of new criteria for the creation and manage-
ment of protected areas. This world concern was retlected in the
elaboration and ratification of treaties such as the World Heritage
and Ramsar Conventions and the establishment of UNESCO's
Man and the Biosphere Programme (see Table 8.1 and Figure 8.2).
These initiatives marked the emergence of conservation and pro-
tected areas as international issues and not just national concerns.

In the 1980s, concern revolved around the ability to conserve
natural areas as a resource to sustain human societies in the
future. Conserving the diversity of genes, organisms and
ecosystems was seen as a legitimate aim in order to maintain
nature's ability to change and adapt whilst also keeping open
people's options for developing new crops and drugs.

Throughout the region, major legislative strengthening took
place in the 1980s. In Central America, protected area laws
were enacted in Belize and Guatemala and there was a consider-
able strengthening of Costa Rica's protected areas system.
Panama declared 14 out of its 20 existing protected areas,
accounting for 95 per cent of the area of the national system.
Honduras declared its three most important protected areas and
Guatemala and Nicaragua each declared their countries" two
biggest biosphere reserves (Ugalde and Godoy. 1992). At this
time in South America, many countries made an important step
by producing plans for consolidation of their protected areas
into systems, rather than treating them as independent units
(Torres. 1992). Similar changes also took place in the
Caribbean, where the establishment of protected areas was more
prolific during the 1980s than ever before (Putney, 1992).

The 1980s also saw the establishment of Conservation Data
Centres (CDCs) by governments, universities and non-govern-
mental organisations (NGOs) in several countries in the
Americas. These CDCs. assisted by the US NGO The Nature
Conservancy (TNC). collect, store and analyze information for
use in siting and managing protected areas (Norris. 1988).

In addition, the 1980s saw the beginning of a movement to
integrate local communities into protected areas, from which they
had become divorced by the traditional concept of national parks
as inviolable sanctuaries. Local communities were a key issue at
the Third World Parks Conference in Bali in 1982 (McNeely and
Miller. 1984). Biosphere reser\es and indigenous reserves were a
product of the realisation that protected areas would simply not
function without the support and participation of the local people.

Unfortunately, the 1980s also saw the deepening of the
severe economic and social crises which still afflict inan)
nations in the Neotropics today. In the face of falling commod-
ity prices on world markets, burgeoning national debt, hyperin-
fiation and commitments to austerity programmes, many gov-
ernments had little possibility of strengthening their environ-
ment departments and protected area agencies. This seriously
hampered attempts to expand and consolidate protected area
systems in the Americas. Legislation could not be enforced and
parks could not be managed effectixely (Putney. 1992: Torres,
1992; Ugalde and Godoy. 1992).

The Coverage of Protected Areas in the Americas

Reviews of regional protected area coverage have been carried
out by Oltremari (1992). Putney (1992). Torres (1992) and
Ugalde and Godoy ( 1992). Older reviews, which give a histori-
cal perspective, include Hartshorn and Green (1985) on Central
America, and Wetterberg (1974) and Wetterberg et al. (1985)
for South America. In addition, there are country-by-country
analvses for South America (Amend and Amend, 1992b) and

Protected Areas

Central America (Morales and Cifuentes. 1989). Excellent
national studies have also been earned out in many countries,
for example, Alcerreca et cil. (1988) for Mexico, APN (1991)
for Argentina. CDC-UNALM (1991) for Peru and SEA/DVS
(1990) for the Dominican Republic.

At present, terrestrial protected areas under lUCN manage-
ment categories I-IV (those receiving a higher degree of protec-
tion — see Box 1) in the countries being considered in this
Atlas, cover 4.8 per cent of South America, 4.3 per cent of
Central America (but 9.5 per cent if Mexico is excluded) and
7.1 per cent of the Caribbean (WCMC. unpublished data — see
Table 8.2). 0\er 900 category I-IV protected areas have been

established in the countries covered in this Atlas. They are not,
however, evenly distributed amongst the countries. Again con-
sidering categories I-IV. the Dominican Republic has 23.6 per
cent of its land area protected, Panama has 17.5 per cent,
Venezuela has 16.2 per cent; while El Salvador, Jamaica, Haiti,
French Guiana and Guyana all have one per cent or less of their
land area protected within categories l-IV (WCMC. unpub-
lished data — see Table 8.2).

These figures by themselves give little clue as to the "value""
of protected areas in different countries. To get an idea of this
one must also consider how areas have been selected for protec-
tion and how they are managed.

Table 8.1 State parties to international and regional conventions or programmes concerned with (he conservation of natural areas

Country World International Rainsar Western Cartagena SPAW Amazon

Heritage Biosphere Convention' Hemisphere Convention' Protocol" Cooperation

Convention' Reserves- Convcntioir Treaty

SOUTH AMERICA

Bolivia

4 Oct 76

Brazil

I Sep 77(1)

Colombia

24 May 83

Ecuador

16 June 75 (2)

French Guiana (France)

27 Jun 75

Guyana

20 Jun 77

Paraguay

28 Apr 88

Peru

24 Feb 82 (4)

Surinam

Venezuela

3 Oct 90

CENTRAL AMERICA

Belize

6 Nov 90

Costa Rica

23 Aug 77 (I)

EI Salvador

8 Oct 91

Guatemala

16 Jan 79(1)

Honduras

8 Jun 79(1)

Mexico

23 Feb 84 (2)

Nicaragua

17 Dec 79

Panama

3 Mar 78 (2)

CARIBBEAN

Antigua and Barbuda

1 Nov 83

Cuba

24 Mar 81

Dominica

Dominican Republic

12 Feb 85

Grenada

Guadeloupe (France)

27 Jun 75

Haiti

18 Jan 80

Jamaica

14 Jun 83

Martinique (France)

27 Jun 75

Puerto Rico (USA)

7 Dec 73

St. Kitts and Nevis

10 Jul 86

St. Lucia

14 Oct 91

St. Vincent and the Grenadines

Trinidad and Tobago

27 Oct 90 ( 1 )
24 Sep 93 (5)

7 Jan 91 (2)
1 Dec 86 (2)

30 Mar 92 (3)

22 Nov 85 ( 1 )

23 Nov 88(1)

27 Apr 92 (3)

26 Oct 90 (I)
23 Oct 93 ( 1 )
4 Nov 86 ( I )

26 Nov 90 (3)

1 Dec 86 ( I )

1 Dec 86
18 Dec 86

21 Apr 92(1)

Y
Y
Y
Y

Y
Y
Y
Y
Y

Y
Y
Y

Y
Y

Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y

Y
Y

Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y

Y
Y
Y
Y

Y
Y
Y

Source: WCMC. unpublished

1 — World Herilage Contention: dale of becoming a party, with number of siles (December 1993 baseline) inscribed in brackets

2 — Numher of Inlernalional (MAB) Biosphere Reserves (June 19^4 baseline)

3 — Ramsar Convention: date Conveniion came into force, with number of sites recognised in brackets {June 1994 baseline)

4 — Western Hemisphere Convention: Y = signed

5 — Convention for the Protection and Development of the Wider Caribbean Region (Cartagena Conveniion ): Y = signed

6 — SPAW Protocol: protocol concerning Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife: Y = signed

7 — Amazon Cooperation Treaty; Y = signed

Protected Areas

Table 8.2 Protected areas classified under lUCN categories I-IV
(marine reserves are not included)

Counlry

No. of

Protected

Land area

Percento

protected

area

(sq. km)

of land

areas

coverage
(sq. km)

area
covered

CARIBBEAN

Antigua and

41*

440

9.3

Barbuda

Cuba

3.139

110.860

2.8

Dominica

750

10.0

Dominican Rep

11.435

48.380

23.6

Grenada

340

Guadeloupe

210

1.690

12.4

Haiti

27.560

0.3

Jamaica

10.830

Martinique

1.060

1.1

Puerto Rico

181

8.860

2.0

St Kitts and Nevis 2

272

9.6

St Lucia

610

2.6

St Vincent and

390

11.3

the Grenadines

Trinidad/Tobago

177

5.130

3.5

Total

141

15.431

217.172

7.1

CENTRAL AMERICA

Belize

2.477

22.800

10.9

Costa Rica

6.341

51.060

12.4

El Salvador

20,720

0.3

Guatemala

8.334

108.430

7.7

Honduras

8.636*

111.890

7.7

Mexico

56,994

1.908.690

3.0

Nicaragua

9.050

118.750

7.6

Panama

13.272

75.990

17.5

Total

317

105.156

2.418.330

4.3

SOUTH AMERICA

Bolivia

92.200

1.084.390

8.5

Brazil

274

249.131

8.456.510

2.9

Colombia

90.157

1.038.700

8.7

Ecuador

31.254

276,840

11.3

French Guiana

88.150

Guyana

586

208.419+

0.3

Paraguay

13.954

397.300

3.5

Peru

41.196

1 .280.000

3.2

Surinam

7.361

143.662+

5.1

Venezuela

143.131

882.050

16.2

Total

473

668.970

13.856.021

4.8

Grand total

931

789.557

16.491.523

4.8

For a large number of sites, size of protected area is not known

Land area has been derived from Mundocan. which is based on the Operational Navigation

Charts (1:1 million), rather than from FAO

Effectiveness of Legislation and Management

Ideally protected areas should be managed under a comprehensive
protected areas law. Such laws now exist in Bolivia and
Guatemala. More often protected areas are covered under more
general environmental legislation such as land reform laws (El
Salvador), forest laws (Costa Rica, Panama), territorial planning
laws (Venezuela), environment laws (Brazil. Colombia, Cuba.
Mexico), or under a range of different acts (Nicaragua). Some
countries (Costa Rica. Panama. Venezuela) are in the process of
passing protected areas laws (lUCN, 1992; Marchetti el id., 1992).

Lack of coherent legislation has been cited, both by state
management agencies and by NGOs, as a major cause of pro-
tected area deficiencies in almost all Neotropical countries. In
many cases, legislation is internally inconsistent and protected
area legislation conflicts with that governing other types of
resource use, most commonly mineral/hydrocarbon extraction
(lUCN, 1992). In Ecuador for example, the 1981 Law of
Forestry and the Conservation of Wildlife prohibits all commer-
cial activities in protected areas whilst the 1988 Hydrocarbon
Law allows for oil exploitation (Cabarle et at.. 1989: MAG.
n.d.). Similar situations are to be found in Chile (Gutierrez.
1992). Peru (Ferreyros. 1988). Bolivia (Marconi. 1989) and the
Dominican Republic (SEA/DVS. 1990).

As discussed previously, international conventions have
helped a great deal in standardising legislation throughout the
region, but their effectiveness depends on whether their spirit is
embodied in national legislation. For example. Mexico has
signed the Washington and World Heritage Conventions,
although its tenets have not been fully incorporated into national
legislation (Ramos. 1988).

The results of recent analyses of quality of management are
sobering (Putney, 1992; Torres, 1992; Ugalde and Godoy,
1992). In Central America, the majority of protected areas,
including Darien National Park in Panama and Zapatera and
Cerro Saslaya National Parks in Nicaragua, are not adequately
inanaged. Many parks are not delimited in the field. For the
majority (60 per cent), the management agency has not acquired
land-rights. Many have no resident staff. In all, 30 per cent of
Central American protected areas are "paper parks", in other
words a decree is the only token of their creation (Ugalde and
Godoy, 1992). In South America the situation is little better.
Whilst 30 per cent of protected areas do have management
plans, only five per cent implement them. Some 70 per cent
receive no government support and less than 1 per cent have
sufficient personnel. As a result. 86 per cent are affected by
incompatible activities, ranging from agriculture to oil exploita-
tion (Amend and Amend, 1992a; Torres, 1992). In 1991, a study
of 148 of South America's national parks, revealed that the
main problems were extraction of natural resources from the
park, lack of qualified personnel and infrastructure, and unre-
solved land-rights (Amend and Amend. 1992a). A similar situa-
tion is found in the Caribbean: two-thirds of protected areas are
not achieving the objectives for which they were established.
Some 24 per cent are protected in name only and another 43 per
cent are only partially managed (Putney, 1992).

In Mexico, dispersion of responsibilities for protected areas
and repeated changes in the structure of agencies managing the
areas have meant that the national management agency SEDUE
has been unable to apply adequate management regimes to its
protected areas (Ramos, 1988). Changes in management struc-
tures continue, but do not necessarily lead to improved protec-
tion in the field (Perez-Gil and Jaramillo, 1992).

Few countries have totally satisfactory protected area sys-
tems. In Central America, practically all countries have prelimi-
nary drafts of plans for a protected area system. Costa Rica is
the most advanced country in this respect and has even analyzed
its protected areas at a regional level. However, El Salvador is
the only country to have developed a true system plan (Ugalde
and Godoy, 1992). Argentina. Ecuador and Peru have produced
system strategies (APN. 1991; CDC-UNALM, 1991; Cifuentes
et at.. 1989), whilst Paraguay and Venezuela are defining sys-
tems (DPNVS/CDC-Paraguay, 1990; MARNR, 1989). System
plans have been produced for eight out of the 25 Caribbean

Protected Areas

Figure 8.2 Distribution of protected areas designated under international conventions and programmes
Source: WCMC, unpublished data

80 120 160 km

.J L

Ramsar Sites

Bolivia

1 Laguna Colorada
Brazil

2 Ilha do Bananal

3 Lagoa do Peixe

4 Mamiraud

5 Parque Nacional do
Panianal

6 Reentrancias Maranhenses
Costa Rica

I Caiio Negro

8 Palo Verde

9 Tamarindo
Ecuador

10 Machalilla

I I Manglares Churute
French Guiana

12 Basse-Mana

13 Les Marais De Kaw
Guadeloupe

14 Grand Cul-de-Sac Marin
de la Guadeloupe

Guatemala

15 Laguna del Tigre
Honduras

1 6 Banas de Cuero y Salado
Mexico

1 7 Rfa Lagartos

Panama

18 Golfo de Montijo

19 Puma Patino

20 San San — Pond Sak
Peru

21 Lagunas de Meji'a

22 Pacaya Samiria

23 Paracas
Surinam

24 Coppenamemonding
Trinidad and Tobago

25 Nariva Swamp
Venezuela

26 Cuare

World Heritage Sites

Brazil

11 Igua^u National Park

Costa Rua

28 Talamanca Range-La
Amislad Reserves

Ecuador

29 Galapagos Islands

30 Sangay National Park
Guatemala

31 Tikal National Park
Honduras

32 Rio Platano WHS

Mexuo

33 -El Vizcaino Whale
Lagoon'

34 Sian Ka'an Biosphere
Reserve

Panama

35 Darien National Park

36 La Amistad International
Park

Peru

37 Huascaran National Park

38 Manu National Park

39 Rio Abiseo National Park

40 Sanctuario Historico de
Macchu Picchu

Biosphere Reserves

Bolivia

41 Estacion Biol6gica Beni

42 Parque Nacional Pilon-
Lajas

43 Reserva Nacional de Fauna
"UllaUlla"

Brazil

44 Cerrado

45 Reser\'a da Biosfera da
Mata Atlantica (stretching
along the Atlantic coast of
Brazil)

Colombia

46 Cinturon Andino Cluster
Biosphere

47 El Tuparro Nature Reserve

48 Sierra Nevada de Santa
Marta

Costa Rica

49 Cordillera Volcanica
Central

50 Reserva de la Biosfera
de la Amistad

Cuba

5 1 Baconao

52 Cuchillas del Toa

53 Peninsula de
Guanahacabibes

54 Sierra del Rosario
Ecuador

55 Archipielago de Colon
(Galapagos)

56 -Reserva de la Biosfera

de Yasuni
Guadeloupe

57 Guadeloupe Archipelago
Guatemala

58 Maya

59 Sierra de las Minas
Honduras

60 Rio Platano Biosphere
Reserve

Mexico

61 Calakmul

62 El Pinacate y Gran
Desierto de Altar

63 El Trifinio

64 El Vizcaino

65 Monte Azules

66 Reserva de Mapimi

67 Reserva de la Biosfera
"El Cielo"

68 Reserva de la Biosfera
Sierra de Manant!^

69 Reserva de la Biosfera de
Sian Ka'an

70 Reserva de la Michilia
Panama

7 1 Parque Nacional Fronterizo
Darien

Peru

72 Reserva de Huascaran

73 Reserva del Manu

74 Reserva del Noroesle
Puerto Rico

75 Guanica Commonwealth
Forest Reserve

76 Luquillo Experimental
Forest (Caribbean)

Venezuela

11 Alto Orinoco — Casiquiare

Protected Areas

Categories and Management
Objectives of Protected Areas

I Scientific Reserve/Strict Nature Reserve: to protect
nature and maintain natural processes in an undis-
turbed state in order to have ecologically representa-
tive examples of the natural environment available for
scientific study, environmental monitoring, education
and for the maintenance of genetic resources in a
dynamic and e\olutionary state.

II National Park: to protect natural and scenic areas of
national or international significance for scientific,
educational and recreational use.

III Natural Monument/Natural Landmark: to protect
and preserve nationally significant natural features
because of their special interest or unique characteristics.

IV Managed Nature Reserve/Wildlife Sanctuary: to

assure the natural conditions necessary to protect
nationally significant species, groups of species, biotic
communities, or physical features of the environment
where these require specific human manipulation for
their perpetuation.

Abridged from lUCN (1984)

Note: In 1994 lUCN adopled a revised protected area management classifi-

cation system. For practical reasons the protected areas data given
here is classified according to the former system. For further details
of the re\ised catesories see IL'CN ( 1994)

countries, including the Dominican Republic (SEA/DVS. 19901
and the British Virgin Islands (Putney. 1992).

Lack of a clearly defined environmental policy is often
responsible for a poor system of protected areas. In countries
with no such policy, protected area legislation is frequently a
response to conflicting priorities and emergency situations. In
other countries, where laws exist, regulations for their imple-
mentation may be absent. Alternatively, the laws may rarely be
applied, penalties may be inadequate, or communication
between government departments may be limited (Ramos.
1988). The result of all these problems is inadequate protection
of the environment.

Protected area managers in the Americas are quick to point
out that the problems discussed above will not be solved until
the environment is given a higher position on national agendas,
and that this in turn depends on changes in economic policies,
nationally and internationally (Putney. 1992: Torres. 1992;
Ugalde and Godoy. 1992).

The 198()s saw the appearance of many more NGOs in all
Neotropical countries and. in response to weaknesses in the
public sector, many of them now manage protected areas. There
are at present around 50 NGOs in Ecuador. 80 in Peru and 500
in Brazil (lUCN. 1992). Those administering protected areas
include Fundacion para la Conservacion de la Naturaleza which
manages eight of Peru's protected areas, the Venezuelan foun-
dation FUDENA which manages the Cuare Faunal Refuge and
Ramsar site. Ecuador's Fundacion Natura which is responsible
for two areas and participates in many others. Defensores de la
Naturaleza which manages Guatemala's Sierra de las Minas

Monteverde Cloud Forest. Costa Rica

Monteverde is a private reserve of 105 sq. km established in
1972 located between 800 m and I860 m above sea level in
the Tilaran mountains of north-west Costa Rica. The reserve
is owned and managed by the Tropical Science Centre, a
non-profitmaking Costa Rican organisation. In 1987. nearly
1 3.000 people visited the reserve. They stayed in small hotels
in forest and agricultural land below the reserve boundarv.
The number of hotels is growing as visitors increase, and
associated services such as souvenir shops and restaurants
are being developed.

Agricultural encroachment on the lower Pacific slopes
below the reserve was destroying forest and leading to ero-
sion in the areas where the tourist facilities were located.
These lower lying forests are seasonally important habitats
for the reserve's fauna. In 1986. local biologists and farmers
fonned the Monteverde Conservation League with the aim of
protecting the lower Pacific slopes as a buffer zone for the
reserve. They raised money locally from visitors and from
international conservation organisations, some of the latter in
the form of debt swaps.

The League has purchased farmland in the buffer zone and
is restoring natural forest cover on it. as well as trying to
improve the conservation practices of local farmers. The
League is also running educational programmes for local
children. A guided trail has been established in a
farmland/forest mosaic in order that visitors can observe the
impact of past agriculture on the forest as well as the process
of forest restoration. A recent initiative is the "children's
rainforest" campaign. Children in Sweden. Canada. United
Kingdom. Japan and Germany are raising money for the pur-
chase of additional land for the reserve. Some of these chil-

Mimtevenle cloud Jtii est. Costa Rica ( WWF/Michele Depraz)

dren visit Monteverde to have a look at what they have pur-
chased. It is hoped that this initiative might grow into a loose
network of private forest reserves located throughout the
tropics, each adopted by a children's group.

The Monteverde Conservation League provides a forum
for debate of issues affecting the reser\ e and its surroundings.
There is considerable discussion of the economic impact of
tourism. Income to the reserve exceeded USS30.000 in 1987.
and a cooperative craft shop selling local handicrafts has
annual sales in excess of US$50,000. Many residents would
like tourism to remain small-scale and are concerned that its
benefits should not be excessively concentrated in the hands
of a minority of people. Land prices are escalating and this is
restricting traditional activities in the area. Source: Jim Crisp

Protected Areas

Biosphere Reserve. Lisa de Monteverde managing the
Monteverde Cloud Forest Reserve in Costa Rica (see Box 2)
and Eco-Activo 20-30 (FESA) which runs El Imposible
National Park in El Salvador (lUCN. 1992). Mexico had 200
conservation NGOs by 1986 and the Montes Azules Biosphere
Reserve was established as a result of their action (Ramos.
1988). In addition, organisations such as Monarca A.C. and
Pronatura A.C. in Mexico have been responsible for the inclu-
sion of environmental considerations in the government's plan-
ning process and political agendas.

Additions to Protected Area Systems

Siting of protected areas has often been influenced more by
socioeconomic conditions than by biological considerations
(Leader-Williams et al.. 1990). In other words, protected areas
have almost always been established in areas not in demand for
other land uses.

In the Caribbean. Puerto Rico had only 0.4 per cent of its
original forest left untouched by 1903 (Brash. 1987). but the
forest has now expanded somewhat, while Cuba had lost all but
15 per cent by 1959. In contrast, most of Middle America was
still covered in forest in 1950. but as human population has dou-
bled over the last 30 years, only 60 per cent of this region
remained forested in 1980. In both the Caribbean and Central
America, protected areas were declared to preserve what
remained. South America has a much bigger land area and
lower population: consequently pressure has not been nearly so
severe and even now there is still great scope for decisions over
where to site new protected areas to ensure representative sys-
tems. The South American coastal areas, which were settled
first by Europeans, are less well represented in protected areas

than the largely uncolonised Amazonian region. Large
Amazonian protected areas have been established, for example,
in Bolivia (Carrasco Ichilo and Isiboro Secure National Parks),
Brazil (Amazonia, Jau. Pico da Neblina and Xingu National
Parks), Colombia (El Tuparro and Amacayacu National Parks),
Peru (Manii Biosphere Reserve) and Venezuela (Alto Orinoco-
Casiquiare Biosphere Reserve).

Ideally, conservation priorities should be determined by iden-
tifying and classifying the various elements of biological diver-
sity within the country/region (Burley. 1988): then examining
the existing system of protected areas; and finally, using various
classifications, identifying which elements (major ecosystems,
habitat types, species) are unrepresented or poorly represented.
Many countries have begun this process, often with assistance
from international agencies such as TNC. WWF, lUCN or
WCMC. Peru is a good example of where this has occurred
(CDC-UNALM. 1986. 1991. 1992).

Before meaningful recommendations can be made, however,
detailed analysis must be undertaken at national and local levels
(Putney. 1992; Ugalde and Godoy. 1992). Coverage of protected
areas is often assessed using a habitat classification system such
as Holdridge's Life Zone system (Holdridge. 1967). or by sys-
tems developed by and tailored to national requirements.
Monitoring of protected areas is being carried out in many
Neotropical countries through the Conservation Data Centres, a
good example of which is CDC-UNALM in Peru. Although
Peruvian biologists had long known that Andean cloud forests
and coastal habitats were important areas for conservation, the
analysis carried out by CDC-UNALM revealed these priorities
in a much more systematic, quantified way and identified specif-
ic areas for protection and management (CDC-UNALM. 1986).

People and Parks

According to recent studies of South American national
parks (Amend and Amend. 1992a). some 50 per cent con-
tain subsistence agriculturalists, while a mere 14.1 per cent
are totally uninhabited. Colombia has most closely linked
protected areas with safeguarding indigenous cultures. One
quarter of its national territory has been protected in
indigenous reserves: in 16 cases, indigenous "resguardos"
overlap with national parks. Argentina and Chile are taking
similar steps (Amend and Amend. 1992a).

Land-tenure in protected areas seems to present a partic-
ular problem. Theoretically, in most South American coun-
tries the possibility of expropriating land for the creation of
protected areas exists. However, money and political will
for expropriation are usually lacking. In addition, most
people recognise that expropriation is socially unaccept-
able and that the results are usually negative in the long
term (Amend and Amend. 1992a; Perez Hernandez. 1992).
In Argentina, the law grants the land-owner total dominion
over his land, even to the extent that he may degrade or
destroy it, even within a national park. He may also deny
access to park authorities, thereby making management
impossible. In Chile, this problem has been avoided by
including private areas in proposals for national parks only
if there is a guarantee of a quick acquisition of the land
after the area has been declared. Even so, around 50 per
cent of South American national parks have been created,
at least partially, on existing private lands. This situation is

unlikely to change very much in the near future, and
Amend and Amend (1992b). Janzen (1989) and Perez
Hernandez (1992) recommend revising the concept of
strict protection within national parks as set out in the
Western Hemisphere Convention.

Since the legal situation is often unclear, few park man-
agers have been able to manage communities within parks,
and even fewer management agencies are prepared to make
funds available for resolving conflicts with local communi-
ties (Amend and Amend, 1992a).

Enforcement by itself will not preserve protected areas in
the face of relentless human pressures. Many fieldworkers
have, therefore, tried to set up projects linking biodiversity
conservation in protected areas to local social and economic
development. Projects of this type have been termed
Integrated Conservation-Development Projects (ICDPs). and
they range from community forest management in the
Fundacion Neotropica's Boscosa project in the Osa Peninsula
in Costa Rica to improvement of farming systems in the
Central Selva Resource management Project in Peru's
Palcazu Valley. An excellent, but sobering, evaluation of
ICDPs has been carried out by Wells er al. ( 1992). This study
concludes that the impact of ICDPs is limited because they
do not address the powerful forces generated far from the
national parks themselves, forces which can only be dimin-
ished through macro-economic policy changes. Nevertheless,
even the limited success of these projects is encouraging.

Protected Areas

The Central American protected area system has largely been
directed towards conserving mountain ecosystems including
high peaks and volcanoes where cloud forests are the dominant
forest type. Nevertheless, the forests of Los Morrales de
Chalatenango in El Salvador, the Maya Mountains of Belize and
the Volcan de Ometepe in Nicaragua would be important poten-
tial additions to the system. In contrast, in the central highland
and Pacific coastal lowlands, the protected areas are amongst
the region's smallest and most threatened because of long settle-
ment and high population pressure there. Deforestation in
Mesoamerica has been most acute in the dry forests of the
Pacific slope. All but two per cent of original 550.000 sq. km of
Mesoamerican dry forest (an area the size of France) has been
cleared for farms or pasture and only 0.08 per cent is protected.
These forests support almost as many species as neighbouring
rain forests (Janzen, 1986). Protection needs to be strengthened
and additional areas declared in this region. Overall. Nicaragua
and Guatemala have the greatest potential for declaring new-
areas, particularly in the mountains and on the Atlantic lowlands
(Ugalde and Godoy, 1992).

In South America, four clear priorities are: the Atlantic
forests and semi-deciduous forests of Brazil, the Colombian
Choco. the Pacific dry forests of Ecuador and Peru and the
Eastern Andean forests in Bolivia. Colombia. Ecuador and Peru.
All of these areas are home to a highly endemic flora and fauna
(da Fonseca. 1985: ICBP. 1992: Torres. 1992). The Caribbean,
in contrast to the other two regions, already has a reasonably
representative protected area system (Putney. 1992).

The Coverage of Neotropical Forests by Protected Areas

In an attempt to estimate the area of protected forest, the bound-
aries of protected areas within lUCN's categories I-IV have
been overlain onto the forest data for each country mapped in
this Atlas. Ideally, the area of forest within each protected area
for all countries should be measured, but this has not been done
here for a number of reasons. Firstly, for most countries in the
Caribbean, no forest maps were found: in this region, only
Cuba. Jamaica and Trinidad (excluding Tobago) have been
mapped. Secondly, in some cases location data were not avail-
able, so a number of protected areas have not been mapped at
all. Thirdly, boundary information was not available for all pro-
tected areas; some are identified only with a centre point
derived from latitude and longitude data.

Instead, in Table 8.3. each total area in column 6 is the sum
of the sizes of the protected areas that are shown as containing
forest on the respective country maps, rather than an area of
actual protected forest. In other words, if a protected area
encloses any forest, the total extent of the reserve has been
included in the column 6 figure. In this way, some countries
will be shown as holding more protected forest than they actu-
ally do (for instance, where only a small proportion of a protect-
ed area includes forest), while others will be shown as holding
less (if. for instance, a particular protected area has not been
mapped due to lack of information).

Table 8.3 shows that about 8.4 per cent of the remaining for-
est in Central America (including Mexico) is protected; if
Mexico is excluded, then the percentage is much higher at 19.3
per cent. In South America 9.1 per cent of remaining forest is
protected. It is interesting to note that two of the countries with
the highest percentages of remaining forest cover have the low-
est percentages of forest protection — Guyana (87.8 per cent
remaining forest and only 0.3 percent protected) and French
Guiana (92.4 percent remaining with no protection). Panama and

Transfrontier protected areas

There are ten transfrontier parks in the Americas (Figure
8.3). Reasons for their establishment range from the need to
control the spread of cattle disease in the Los Kati'os-Darien
park between Colombia and Panama, to acting as symbols
for peace in the SI-A-PAZ (Sistema de Areas Protegidas
para la Paz) system between Nicaragua and Costa Rica.
Transfrontier areas are valuable from the biological stand-
point because they protect much larger areas of contiguous
ecosystems than would be possible within one country
alone. Their large size provides for greater genetic and
species diversity and allows populations of rare species to
be maintained well above minimum viable population lev-
els. Management of transfrontier parks is often based on
informal collaboration as in the El Tama park where
researchers from both Colombia and Venezuela work freely
throughout the park without the need for border controls.
Collaboration is at its strongest in La Amistad where both
Costa Rican and Panamanian parks services have developed
complimentary management plans for the entire park
(Marchetticn;/., 1992)

f^-.

^-C^

^^'^^--

»•• /s. rx)8

"^^-s

Gran Peten — \ ^T^

Belizc/Gualemala/Mexico \ /T^Q ^^
Chiquihul/Monlafias Mayas N. 5^ ^

— Belize/Graiemala ^JT^in

\ 1

Trifinio — EI Salvador/
Guatemala/Honduras

V /

SI-A-PAZ — Cosia Rica/Nicaniguj

r^V

v^ /

La Amislad — Costa Rica/Panama

)

\_>J>,II ^

Los Kalios/Darii^n —
Colombia/Panama

El Tama — ColumbiaA'enezuela

1 ^y

Do Pico da NeblJna/La Neblina —
Brazil/Venezuela \0'^

Manunpi Healh/Pampas del Heaih — l>f^l3 _ J"
Bolnia/Peru KT V

10
II
12

Sajama/Lauca — Boli\ia/Chilc ^ \ /
Iguazii/do Igua^u — Argentina/Brazil -^ \_\k \
LaninA'illarica — Argentina/Chile "^V) /

Nahuel Huapi/Puyehue y Vincenle •^f^ — L
Perez Rosales — ArgentJna/Chite ^^-il::

•£=>

Los Glaciare.s/B. O'Higgins y Torres
del Paine — Argenlina/Chile

Figure 8.3 Map of transfrontier protected areas in the
Americas Soune: Marchetli il <il. I 092)

Table 8.3 Protected area coverage of tropical forest as shown on the Maps in this Atlas

Protected Areas

Coiiiilry

Land area
iscj. km)

CARIBBEAN'

Cuba

110.860

Jamaica

10.830

Trinidad and Toba

igo 5.130

CENTRAL AMERICA

Belize

22.800

Costa Rica

.51.060

El Salvador

20.720

Guatemala

108.4.30

Honduras

111.890

Mexico

1.908.690

Nicaragua

118.750

Panama

75,990

Total

2.418.330

SOUTH AMERICA

Bolivia

1,084.390

Brazil

8,456,510

Colombia

1,038,700

Ecuador

276.840

French Guiana

88.150

Guyana

208.419-

Paraguay

397.300

Peru

1,280,000

Surinam

143.662^

Venezuela

882.050

Total

13.856.021

Reiiiiiiiuii)> area
of tropical forest
as defined in this
Atlas (sq. km)

25,035
3,181
1.683'

18.393
15.049
1.555
48,244
52,735-'
515.000'
57.450
33,053'

741.479

451,426

3,415,308

510,935

142.370

81.490
183.025

47.488'
674.340"
133,284
542,682

6.182.348

Reiiiainin^ area

Total area of

Percentage of

of tropical forest

protected areas

remaining forest

as a percentage

within WCN

with forest

protected {sq. km)

of land area

categories I-IV
(sq. km)

(sq. km)"

22.6

3,139

2.922

11.9

29.4

32.8'

177"

159'

9.4

80.7

2,477

2,452

13.3

29.5

6,341

5.770

38.3

7.5

3.3

44.5

8,334

8.318

17.2

47.1

8,636'"

6.425

12.2

27.0

56,994

18,240

3.5

48.4

9.050

7.628

13.3

43.5

13.272

13.200

39.9

30.7

41.6
40.4
49.2
51.4
92.4
87.8
12.0
52.7
92.8
61.5

44.6

105.156

92.200

249.131

90,157

31,254

586

13.954

41.196

7.361

143.131

668.970

62.085

83,655

179,835

88.469

23.485

586

1,151

40,298

7.090

135.928

560.497

8.4

18.5
5.3

17.3

16.5

0.3
2.4
6.0
5.3

25.0

9.1

Forest maps were oblained for only three of the Caribbean islands. It is not. therefore, possible to give a total protected forest area for the Caribbean, nor. consequently, for the whole of the

Neotropical region.

The borders between the Guianas are disputed and in this instance figures from Map 29.1 for Guyana and Map 23.1 for Surinam have been used, rather than FAO's figures of 196,850 sq. km

and 156,000 sq. km respectively.

For Trinidad only

Not including mangroves

Masera el al. ( 19921 - see Chapter 2 1

INRENARE ( 1 990) - see Chapter 23

In eastern Paraguay only

FAO 1 1993) - see Chapter 3 1

Including Tobago

For a large number of sites, the size of protected area is not known

This area is derived from overlaying protected area boundary information onto the forest maps shown in this Atlas, As explained in this chapter, there will be a degree of error due to the way

in which this figure has been calculated.

Costa Rica have the highest percentages of forest protected.
(39.9 per cent and 38.8 per cent respectively), about twice as
much as any country other than Venezuela, which is the next
highest with 25 per cent protected. In Central America, it is only
El Salvador and Mexico which have less than 10 per cent of their
remaining forest protected, while in South America only Bolivia.
Colombia. Ecuador and Venezuela have over 1 per cent.

New Sources of Finance for Protected Areas

In response to growing economic crises and the consequent
short-fall of state support, many countries have had to rely on
international NGOs and aid agencies for funding. The Nature
Conservancy programme for establishing national Conservation
Data Centres has already been mentioned. In addition. TNC
runs a "Parks in Peril" Programme, an emergency effort to safe-
guard imperiled natural areas. TNC plans to bring on-site man-

agement to 200 critical protected areas in the Americas between
1990 and 2000 (TNC. 1990). The Wildlife Conservation Society
(WCS. previously WCI) has long been funding small scale pro-
jects in protected areas throughout the Neotropics. Paseo
Pantera, a consortium formed by WCS and the Caribbean
Conservation Corporation, aims to preserve biological diversity
and enhance wildlands management in Central America. Its pro-
gramme for protected areas includes linking forest fragments
into wildlife corridors, protecting watersheds, setting up buffer-
zones and promoting ecotourism and environmental education
(Anon., n.d.).

Some NGOs have raised revenues by debt-purchasing
ari-angements as a means of funding protected areas at little cost
to the state. In 1987, through the world's first debt-swap.
Conservation International purchased USS650.000 of Bolivian
debt for US$100,000. The debt was then surrendered in

Protected Areas

exchange for a commitment from the Bolivian government of
15.000 sq. km of land and USS250.000 maintenance funds to
expand existing protected areas in north west Bolivia to form
the Rio Beni Biosphere Reserve. However, some Neotropical
countries have been reluctant to agree to debt-swaps because
they may be seen to imply a surrender of national sovereignty to
foreign organisations.

Less problematic debt-swaps were carried out between
1987-1989 by the Fundacion Natura of Ecuador, aided by TNC
and WWF. The foundation bought US$10 million of Ecuador's
national debt and converted the proceeds into conservation
bonds which are used by the foundation and the government in
the management of protected areas. The interest from these
bonds, for 1987 alone, was equivalent to the funding provided
by the state. By 1991, six protected areas had benefited from the
scheme (Oviedo, 1991; Torres, 1992). Even these relatively
large amounts of money are small in comparison with the
US$1. ^5 million which has accrued to Costa Rica through debt-
for-nature-swaps (Ugalde and Godoy, 1992).

Tourism has become an important way of earning foreign
revenue for Neotropical countries. It is currently the
Caribbean's only growth industry (Putney, 1992). There has
been particular growth in the sector of the business which
includes adventure tourism, nature tourism and ecotourism. The
possibilities of linking revenue from these types of tourism with
financing protected areas has been studied in depth (Boo, 1990).

but clear examples of how tourism has been successfully har-
nessed to this end arc infrequent. .Some obvious beneficiaries
have been the protected areas of Costa Rica and to some extent
the Caribbean, partly because of their close proximity to the
USA and also because of the well-developed tourism infrastruc-
ture in these countries.

Protected areas owned and administered by private individu-
als or organisations began to appear very recently in the
Neotropics. They collectively comprise an insignificant propor-
tion of national territories, nevertheless, they are well funded in
comparison with state areas and some are of high conservation
value. It seems that their importance will increase as concern
about the environment grows. Well-known examples of private
protected areas are Monteverde and La Selva in Costa Rica, the
ranches in the Venezuelan llanos where tourism is used to
finance the management of natural and man-made habitats for
wildlife, and the growing network of reserves managed by the
Fundacion Moises Bertoni in Paraguay.

Priorities for Action

Regional priorities for action were summarised in the IV World
Parks Congress held in Caracas in February 1992 (Putney,
1992; Torres. 1992; Ugalde and Godoy. 1992). Four common
themes emerge, they are:

1) Improving management: Systems to monitor protected
areas and evaluate their management are needed so that prob-

ExTR ACTIVE Reserves in Brazil

The exploitation of rubber from the tree Heveu hrasiliensis
began in earnest in the tniddle of the last century, spreading
from the mouth of the Amazon up-river and westward into the
headwaters of tributaries in Bolivia. Colombia and Peru.
Collection and processing of the tree's latex was carried out
by migrant labourers, or "seringueiros". from Northeast Brazil
who lived in a state of debt-bondage. They traded rubber for
the food and tools necessary for survival (Alegretti, 1988).

In the early part of this century, the Brazilian rubber
industry was all but destroyed by a combination of competi-
tion from synthetic rubbers, rubber from newly-established
Malaysian plantations and the attacks of a fungus
{Microcyclus ullci) which thwarted attempts to establish

Rubber tapper xcDriiii^ the bark of a wild rubber tree in A/ti)
Jiinia extnietive reserve. Acre. Brazil.

(WWF/Edward Parker)

plantations in Amazonia (May. 1992). Indeed, were it not for
government subsidies and protection, the industry would no
longer exist. Today, some rubber tappers still pay rent to a
patron — or "seringalista" — for usufruct rights. Others,
however, have broken free of this system and achieved a
iTieasure of independence. They have also diversified into
collection of other latexes, Brazil nuts and palm hearts. Until
recently, however, they did not possess land rights and many
seringalistas sold their land to speculators who converted
large areas to poor quality cattle pasture (May, 1992).

In the late 1970s, the rubber tappers of Acre State and
other parts of western Amazonia began a nonviolent cam-
paign known as "empate" (stalemate) in order to impede land
clearance in areas with economically important trees. In 1985,
representatives of a number of rural workers unions and pro-
ducer associations met in Brasilia to found the National
Council of Rubber Tappers and demand the creation of
extractive reserves ("re.servas extrativistas") that would legit-
imise producers' property rights over the forest resources on
which they depend. Such reserves would be common proper-
ty, managed by forest-dwelling communities in recognition of
their traditional patterns of occupation. This alternative form
of resource ownership has been increasingly recognised by
state and national governments as a useful mechanism for
resolving conflicts over access to and use of extractive
resources (see UICN, 199.^).

As a result of the 1985 meeting, 24 extractive reserves
have now been declared in Brazil covering over 40,000 sq.
km. Today there are some 68,000 families involved in rubber
tapping in Amazonia, each usually managing 3-5 sq. km of
forest with at least 120 rubber trees along the collecting trails
(Bunyard. 1992).

Protected Areas

lems can be identified and conective action be taken. Training
of protected area managers and field personnel is urgent. Both
these needs are being addressed by, for example, the coopera-
tion programmes of FAO/UNEP. the Amazon Cooperation
Treaty and CATIE in Central America.

2) Enhancing revenue generation: Innovative means of rev-
enue generation are needed — these must include more interna-
tional participation. Emphasis should be placed on long-range
finance mechanisms, such as the establishment of trust funds. In
the Caribbean, much of this additional revenue can be generated
from tourism, whereas Central and South America will depend
more on financial transfers from rich countries as payment for
the conservation of "global environmental values".

3) Achieving more effective cooperation: Improving commu-
nications between protected area managers in the Neotropics is
a priority. Once this is achieved, regional support will be
required in order to promote technical cooperation and set up
pilot projects. In addition, increased cooperation with interna-
tional agencies is required, particularly in the fields of technol-
ogy transfer and information exchange.

4) Integrating local communities: Protected area managers

must identify mechanisms to allow local people to participate in
protected area design and management. Meanwhile parks
should be geared to provide socioeconomic benefits to sur-
rounding communities or else mechanisms must be found to
compensate people for costs that they incur when protected
areas are established on their land.

Conclusions

The Neotropics are fortunate enough to have fairly extensive
(although not always representative) systems of protected
areas already established. Legislation is good on the whole and
new areas are being designated at a rapid rate. Unfortunately,
mainly as a result of difficult economic conditions, many of
these areas are not adequately managed. Nevertheless, the con-
servation community in the Neotropics. both governmental
and non-governmental, is extremely resourceful and there
have been exciting developments in the search for support for
protected areas. It is to be hoped that innovations such as
extractive reserves (see Box 3) and CDCs will have relevance
beyond the borders of the Neotropics in conserving the
world's natural heritage.

References

Alcerreca, C Consejo, J. J.. Flores. O., Gutierrez. D..
Hentschell. E.. Herzig. M.. Perez-Gil. R., Reyes, J.M.. and
Sanchez-Cordero, V. (1988). Faiiiui silvestre y areas natu-
rales protegidas. Universe Veintiuno. 193 pp.

Alegretti, M.H. (1988). Resenas Extrativistas: Implementagao
de lima alternativa ao desinataineiuo na Amazonia. Paper
presented in the symposium "Alternativas Ao
Desmatamento". Belem PA. January 1988.

Amend, S. and Amend. T. (1992a). ^.Habitantes en los parques
nacionales ^una contradiccion insoluble? In: ^Espacios sin
Haljitantes? Parques nacionales de America del Siir. Amend,
S. and Amend, T. (Eds). lUCN/Editorial Nueva Sociedad,
Caracas, Venezuela. Pp. 457^72.

Amend, S. and Amend, T. (1992b). (Eds) ^Espacios sin
Hahitantes? Parques nacionales de America del Sur.
lUCN/Editorial Nueva Sociedad, Caracas, Venezuela. 497 pp.

Anon. (n.d.). Paseo Pantera: Presening biological diversity in
Central America. WCl/CCC. 4 pp.

APN (1991). El sisteina nacional de areas protegidas de la
Repiiblica Argentina: diagnostico de su desarrollo institu-
tional y patrimonio natural. Administracion de Parques
Nacionales. Buenos Aires. Argentina. 127 pp.

Boo, E. (1990). Ecotourism: Tlie Potentials and Pitfalls. WWF.
Washington DC. 72 pp (Vol 1) and 155 pp (Vol II).

Brash, A.R. (1987). The history of avian extinction and forest
conversion on Puerto Rico. Biological Consen'ation 39(2):
97-111.

Bunyard, P. (1992). Sustainable Economies in the Tropical
Forest. (Unpublished). 21pp.

Burley. F.B. (1988). Monitoring biological diversity for setting
priorities for conservation. In: Biodiversity. Wilson. E.O.
(ed.). National Academic Press, Washington. Pp. 227-230.

Cabarle, B.J., Crespi, M., Calaway, H.D., Luzuriaga, C.C.,
Rose. D. and Shores, J.N. (1989). An Assessment of
Biological Diversity and Tropical Forests for Ecuador.
Prepared for US-AID/Ecuador as an Annex to the Country
Development Strategy Statement 1989-1990. I 10 pp.

CDC-UNALM (1986). Ecosi.stemas crilicos del Peru. Informe

al World Resources Institute (WRI). Centro de Datos para la
Conservacion-Universidad Nacional La Molina, Lima, Peru.

CDC-UNALM (1991). Plan director del Sistema Nacional de
Unidades de Conservacion iSINUC): una apro.ximacion
desde la diversidad biologica. Centro de Datos para la
Conservacion-Universidad Nacional La Molina, Lima, Pena.

CDC-UNALM (1992). Estado de Conservacion de la
Diversidad Natural de la Region Noroeste del Peru. Centro
de Datos para la Conservacion-Universidad Nacional La
Molina, Lima, Penj.

Cifuentes, M.. Ponce. A., Alban, P., Mena. P.. Mosquera. G.,
Rodriguez, J., Silva, D., Suarez, L., Tobar, A. and Torres, J.
(1989). Estrategia para el Sistema Nacional de Areas
Protegidas del Ecuador. II Ease. DINAF-MAG/Fundacion
Natura. Quito. Ecuador. 196 pp.

da Fonseca, G.A.B. (1985). The vanishing Brazilian Atlantic
Forest, Biological Conservation 34: 17-34.

Denevan, W.M. ( 1992). The Native Population of the Americas
in 1492. Second edition. University of Wisconsin Press,
Madison.

DPNVS/CDC-Paraguay (1990). Areas Prioritarias para la
Conservacion en la Region Oriental del Paraguay. Direccion
de Parques Nacionales-Centro de Datos para la
Conservacion, Asuncion, Paraguay. 99 pp.

Ferreyros, A. ( 1988). Situacion actual de los parques nacionales
X otras unidades de consen'acion en el Peru. Asociacion de
Ecologi'a y Conservacion (ECCO), Lima. 21 pp.

Gomez-Pompa, A. (1991). Learning from traditional ecological
knowledge: insights from Mayan silviculture. In: Rain Forest
Regeneration and Management. Gomez-Pompa, A.,
Whitinore, T.C. and Hadley, M. (eds). UNESCO/Parthenon,
Paris. Pp. 335-341

Gutierrez, D. (1992). Legislacion chilena sobre parques
nacionales: uso de los recursos naturales. In: ^Espacios sin
Habitantes? Parques Nacionales de America del Sur.
Amend, S. and Amend, T. (eds). lUCN and Editorial Nueva
Sociedad. Caracas. Pp. 159-172.

Hartshorn. G.S. and Green, G.C. (1985). Wildlands

Protected Areas

Cotiservdiiiin in Northern Central America. CATIE/Tropical
Science Centre. Costa Rica.

Holdridge. L.R. (1967). Life Zone Ecology. Tropical Science
Center. San Jcse. 206 pp.

ICBP (1992). Putting Biodiversity on the Map: priority area.',
for global conservation. International Council for Bird
Preservation, Cambridge, UK. 90 pp.

lUCN (1984). Categories and criteria for protected areas. In:
National Parks, Con.servation and Development. The role of
protected areas in sustaining society. McNeely. J-A. and
Miller. K.R. (Eds). Smithsonian Institution Press.
Washington. Pp. 47-53.

lUCN (1992). Protected Areas of the World: a review of nation-
al systems. Volume 4: Nearctic and Neotropical. Compiled by
WCMC for lUCN. Gland. Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.

lUCN (1994). Guidelines for Protected Area Management
Categories. CNPPA with the assistance of WCMC. lUCN.
Gland. Switzerland and Cambridge. UK. 261 pp.

Janzen. D.H. (1986). Guanacaste National Park: tropical eco-
logical and cultural restoration. San Jose, Costa Rica
EUNED-FPN-PEA. 104 pp.

Janzen, D.H. (1989). The evolutionary biology of national
parks. Conservation Biology .^ (2): 109-1 10.

Leader-Williams, N.. Harrison. J. and Green, M.J. P. (1990).
Designing protected areas to conserve natural resources.
Science Progress 74; 189-204.

MAG (n.d.). Diagnostico — Plan de accion forestal 1991-1995.
Subsecretari'a Forestal y de Recursos Naturales, Ministerio de
Agricultura y Ganaderi'a, Quito, Ecuador. 126 pp.

Marchetti, B.. Oltremari. J. and Peters. H. (1992). Manejo de
Areas Silvestres Protegidas Fronterizas en America Latina.
FAO/PNUMA, Santiago. Chile. 120 pp.

Marconi. M. (1989). Base Legal del Sistema de Areas
Protegidas de Bolivia. Evaluacion General. Centre de Datos
para la Conservacion, CDC-Bolivia, La Paz. 40 pp.

MARNR (1989). Marco Conceptual del Plan del Sistema
Nacional de Areas Naturales Protegidas. Serie Informes
Tecnicos DGSPOA/IT/295. Unpublished draft.

May. P. (1992). Common property resources in the neotropics:
theory, management progress, and an action agenda. In:
Conservation of Neotropical Forests. Working from
Traditional Resource Use. Redford, K.H. and Padoch, C.
(eds). Columbia University Press, New York. Pp. 359-378.

McNeely. J. A. (1993). Lessons from the Past: Forests and
Biodiversity. Paper presented to Global Forest Conference.
Bandung. Indonesia. 1 7-20 February 1993. 19pp.

McNeely. J. A. and Miller. K.I. (1984). National Parks.
Conservation and Development: The Role of Protected Areas
in Sustaining Society. Smithsonian, Washington DC. 825 pp.

Morales, R. and Cifuentes, M. (1989) (eds). Sistema regional de
areas silvestres protegidas en America Central: plan dc
accion 1989-2000. CATIE. Turrialba, Costa Rica. 122 pp.

Norris, R. ( 1988). Data for diversity: Conservation Data Centres
underlie protection efforts in the tropics. TNC News 38( I ):
4-10.

Oltremari, J.V. ( 1992). Situacion actual de las areas protegidas de
America Latina y el Caribe. Flora, Fauna y Areas Silvestres
Alio 6 No. 14. FAO/PNUMA, Santiago, Chile. Pp. 17-24

Oviedo, G. (1991). Lineamientos y acciones de conservacion
con foiidos de canje de deiida externa. Fundacion Natura:
Programa de Conservacion, Quito. Ecuador. 1 5 pp.

Perez-Gil. R. and Jaramillo. F. ( 1992). Natiudl Protected Areas
in Mexico. A Report for lUCN-BID by P.G.7 Consultores.
S.C. 21 pp.

Perez Hernandez, R. (1992). La ocupacion de los parques
nacionales: una alternativa de solucion. In: ,\Espacios sin
Hahitantes? Parques nacionales de America del Sur. Amend,
S. and Amend. T. (eds). lUCN/Editorial Nueva Sociedad.
Caracas. Venezuela. Pp. 423—^28.

Posey. D.A. (1982). The Keepers of the Forest. Garden 6: 18-24.

Putney. A. ( 1992). Regional Review: Caribbean. Paper presented
at IV World Congress on National Parks and Protected Areas,
Caracas. Venezuela. 10-21 February, 1992. 28 pp.

Ramos, M.A. ( 1988). The conservation of biodiversity in Latin
America: a perspective. In: Biodiversity. Wilson, E.O. (ed).
National Academic Press. Washington. Pp. 428-436.

Sayer, J. (1991). Rainforest Buffer Zones: Guidelines for
Protected Area ManageineiU. lUCN, Gland, Switzerland and
Cambridge. U.K. 104 pp.

SEA/DVS (1990). La Diversidad Bioldgica en la Repiiblica
Dominicana. Report prepared for the Departamento de Vida
Silvestre by the Servicio Aleman de Cooperacion Social-
Tecnica (DED) and the World Wildlife Fund. Secretari'a de
Estado de Agricultura. SURENA/DVS, Santo Domingo.
Repiiblica Dominicana. 266 pp.

TNC ( 1990). Parks in Peril: a consenation partnership for the
Americas. The Nature Conservancy, USA. 24 pp.

Torres, H. ( 1992). Regional Review: America del Sur. Paper pre-
sented at IV World Congress on National Parks and Protected
Areas, Caracas, Venezuela. 10-21 February, 1992.29 pp.

Ugalde, A. and Godoy. J.C. (1992). Regional Review:
Centroamerica. Paper presented at IV World Congress on
National Parks and Protected Areas. Caracas. Venezuela.
10-21 February, 1992. 26 pp.

UICN (1993). El E.xtractivismo en America Latino.
Recomendaciones del Taller UICN-CEE. Amacayacu,
Colombia. Octubre. 1992. Ruiz Perez. M.. Sayer. J. and
Cohen Jehoram. S. (Eds). lUCN. Gland. Switzerland and
Cambridge. UK.

Wells, M. Brandon, K., and Hannah. L. (1992). Parks and
People: linking protected area management with local coin-
tmmities. The World Bank/WWF/USAID. Washington DC,
USA. 99 pp.

WCMC (1993). Protected area suinmaiy statistics: Neotropical
and Caribbean. Unpublished report. World Conservation
Monitoring Centre. Cambridge, UK.

Wetterberg, G.B. (1974). The History and Status of South
American National Parks and an Evaluation of Selected
Management Options. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. University
of Washington, 1974. 253 pp.

Wetterberg. G.B.. Jorge Padua, M.T.. Tresinari, A. and Ponce,
C.F. (1985). Decade of Progress for South American
National Parks. US National Park Service, Washington DC.
125 pp.

Author: Chris Sharpe, Protected Areas Data Unit. WCMC.
Cambridge with contributions from Jerry Harrison, WCMC,
Cambridge. Jeff McNeely and Jim Thorsell, lUCN, Gland.
Switzerland. Hernan Torres. Corporacion, Nacional Forestal.
Chile and Jim Crisp. President. Monteverde Conservation League.

9 A Future for Neotropical
Forests

Introduction

The two years that have elapsed since the United Nations
Conference on Environment and Developinent (UNCED) in Rio
de Janeiro, Brazil have seen a deepening of the rift between rich
and poor countries on forest issues. For instance, the renegotia-
tion of the International Tropical Timber Agreement (ITTA) has
been difficult because of fears that the standards being applied to
the forests of the richer. Northern countries were different from
those being applied in the tropical countries. In addition, the
domination of the Tropical Forestry Action Plan (TFAP) by the
developed Northern countries has been challenged by nationals
of the Southern countries. As a result, the latter have established
a Forestry Forum for Developing Countries, feeling that this will
be more sympathetic to their problems. Similarly, an initiative to
set-up an International Commission on Forestry and Sustainable
Development is foundering on the perception that it has no polit-
ical legitimacy without support from the Southern countries.
There is also a rift between the technologically driven Bretton
Woods Institutions and the more participatory, politically sensi-
tive UN institutions, which has been highlighted by the negotia-
tions for a Global Environment Facility (GEF).

The non-legallv binding authoritative Statement of Principles
for a global consensus on the management, conservation and
sustainable development of all rypes of forests that was adopted
by the UNCED Conference disappointed many by failing to
engage the parties in real commitments to immediate direct
action to halt deforestation. Nevertheless, the fact that the
Statement was hedged in cautious qualifications was a recogni-
tion of the depth and complexity of the factors that lead to the
mismanagement of forest lands. The UN Commission on
Sustainable Development, the follow-up to the Rio Conference,
will not discuss forests until 1995.

The key issues at the Rio Summit were the same as those
confronting everybody trying to conserve Neotropical forests.
Can the forests be used in ways which will enhance the material
and social development of the countries of the region? Will pro-
tecting the so-called global values of the forests, as demanded
by rich Northern countries, require a slowing of the economic
growth that most of the population of Latin America would cer-
tainly aspire to? If it is indeed a question of Latin American
people foregoing the use of their sovereign resources in order to
protect the biodiversity and climatic functions which the indus-
trial world values, can equitable ways be found for the North to
pay the South a "rent"' for the services that the forests provide?
Article 9a of the Statement (see Box) suggests some of the top-

ics that should be taken into consideration by the international
community.

The conclusions of Rio are consistent with those of the
World Consen-ation Strategy (lUCN/UNEP/WWF, 1980), its
successor Caring for the Earth (lUCN/UNEP/WWF, 1991),
Our Common Future (Bruntland Report) (WCED, 1987) and
others. The goods and services provided by forests with high
biological diversity and high biomass are, over extensive areas
of the humid tropics, valuable resources for sustained economic
development. There are global benefits to be derived from con-
serving a high proportion of the biological and environmental
values of these forests which can be maintained only if the trop-
ical countries which possess the forests incur significant "oppor-
tunity costs". In these circumstances it is only right that the
global beneficiaries of forest conservation compensate the peo-
ple of poor countries for these opportunity costs. The Rio
Summit endorsed an expanded GEF to be administered by the
World Bank as a first attempt to pay for global conservation
benefits. Statements by leaders of several industrialised nations
at Rio affirmed a "willingness to pay" for environmental bene-
fits from poor Southern nations.

The forests in the Americas are by far the most extensive
remaining in the humid tropics (see Chapter 1 ). They are richer
in plant and animal species than rain forests in Africa and Asia
and those in South America, at least, are subject to much less
pressure from population growth and resource demand than
those elsewhere in the tropics. Popular claims that virgin forests
will disappear within a human lifetime seem exaggerated.
Nevertheless, in many areas the forests are being used abusively,
cleared to meet the short-term needs of poor farmers or the greed
of speculators and industrialists. An understanding of the ecolog-
ical, social and economic forces underlying this process is essen-
tial if investments in conservation are to be effective and the
negative impacts of "development" are to be minimised.

The Prehistory of Forests in The Americas

As with the world's other tropical forests, those of the Americas
have been affected by periods of marked climatic change during
the Pleistocene. The most recent dry period associated with
glacial advances in high latitudes came to an end less than
10,000 years ago. This concluded a period of several hundred
thousand years during which the rain forests had been repeat-
edly reduced to relatively isolated refuges in localities where
edaphic or relief features allowed these forests to sustain them-

A Future for Neotropical Forests

Article 9 (a) of the statement agrees
that:

"The efforts of developing countries to strengthen the man-
agement, conservation and sustainable development of their
forest resources should be supported by the international
community, taking into account the importance of redress-
ing external indebtedness, particularly where aggravated by
the net transfer of resources to developed countries, as well
as the problem of achieving at least the replacement value
of forests through improved market access for forest prod-
ucts, especially processed products. In this respect, special
attention should also be given to the countries undergoing
the process of transition to market economies."

selves during periods of low rainfall (Haffer. 1969: Prance.
1982: and see Chapter 2). The last of these dry periods occurred
after human beings colonised South America via the Bering
land bridge and the Central American isthmus (see Chapter 6).
This means that the expansion of the forest over the past 10,000
years occurred in an environment where humans were a signifi-
cant ecological force. Fire may not have had the impact in the
Americas that it has had in Africa and Asia, but it had signitl-
cantly modified the vegetation found by Europeans at the end of
the 1 5th century. Wood ash has been found in soil profiles in
many areas of Amazon forest where fire no longer occurs. This
is one indication of the very extensive impact of shifting culti-
vators and hunter-gatherers on the vegetation. The extensive
savannas on the Guyana Shield in Venezuela and Colombia and
in parts of Brazil are thought to have existed throughout the
Holocene and to have been maintained by modest levels of
human activity in areas where soils and rainfall conditions made
the forests particularly susceptible to fire. In the absence of
humans, these areas would almost certainly have reverted to for-
est under the relatively humid climate that has prevailed for the
past 10.000 years (Dourojeanni. 1990).

With the exception of these savanna areas, most of the poten-
tial forest land in the Americas was covered by natural or only
slightly modified forests when the first Europeans arrived 500
years ago. There were, though, some exceptions. For example, in
Central America. Spanish explorers found evidence of extensive
forest modification by the Mayas although Mayan civilisation
had. by then, been in decline for a couple of centuries
(Dourojeanni. 1990). Similarly, when the conquistadors first
"visited" the Andean kingdoms in their quest for Eldorado in the
16th century, they discovered extensive deforestation around the
indigenous cities of the inter-Andean valleys, where modern-day
Quito and Bogota are now found: and Francisco de Orellana. on
his epic voyage down the Amazon in 1542. was impressed by
the densely settled agricultural areas on some of the vdrzea
tloodplains. It is, indeed, highly likely that the Amerindian popu-
lation at that time was considerably higher than the eight million
people who occupied Amazonia in I960 or even the 16 million
people who occupy the basin today. It is, therefore, a myth, that
the Neotropical forests have evolved in pristine isolation. An
indication of how the Amerindian populations altered both low-
land and submontane forests can be gained from the extensive
and sophisticated irrigation systems present along the lower
course of the Magdelena river in Colombia and the widespread
deforestation of parts of Bolivia and Peru, both these environ-
mental modifications took place long before the arrival of

Europeans. However, there is evidence that the agricultural
methods used by the native peoples of Amazonia 500 years ago
were less harmful to the en\ ironment than those practised by
present-day populations. It seems then, that the present diversity
of the forests exists in spite of. or possibly because of. this past
disturbance (see McNeely. 1994).

European Influence and Forest Depletion

European colonists occupied those parts of South America
where the environment most resembled their continent of origin.
This meant that they settled, almost exclusively, in those areas
that had dry climates or were at high elevations or both.
Significant settlement occurred mainly in the "Southern Cone"
of present day Chile and Argentina and in the cool temperate
highlands of the Andes; it was in the Andean valleys that most
deforestation took place during the first four centuries of
European occupation.

Trading settlements were established on the coast, and cities
such as Cartagena. Guayaquil and Caracas developed as gate-
ways to the high elevation interior. The cities on the Brazilian
coast were transit centres for tropical crops such as rubber and
significant forest clearance occurred in their hinterland. The
process of deforestation of the Mata Atlantica. the dry Brazilian
north-east and parts of the Caribbean also began early as land
was cleared for sugar cane and to feed the African slaves who
were brought in to tend the plantations.

In contrast, the early colonists did not occupy the lowland rain
forests, nor did they make significant demand on their resources.
Although rubber, harvested from wild trees of Hevea brasiliensis,
was exported from the Amazon basin for several hundred years,
this never led to significant deforestation, not even when the
development of the process of vulcanisation led to the sudden
expansion of world demand for this commodity in the late 19th
century. The rubber boom was a major event in the history of
Amazonian forests, but the prosperity of the area was based on
extractive economies that were dependent on natural forests,
hence the lack of deforestation. The saga of the feudal and often
cruel bondage systems under which the seriiigiteros worked, the
growth and prosperity of the cities of Manaus and Iquitos. and the
collapse of the rubber-based economy following the establish-
ment of far more productive rubber plantations in Malaysia, is
now familiar. It was these events that made the rubber boom
important as a social phenomenon, laying the foundations for
relations between different ethnic and social groups which have
conditioned many development issues during the 20th century.

Europeans first arrived in the Neotropics 500 years ago. yet
most of the deforestation in the moist low lands of the region has
occurred in the last 30 years. The information that is now emerg-
ing on the impact of indigenous Indian populations on the forests
and the decline of these impacts during the colonial period make
it possible to speculate that the forests in the lowlands of South
America may have been more extensive in 1952 than in 1492.

This is not true of the Caribbean and parts of Central
America where different processes were at work. Much of the
Caribbean was colonised earK and the region became a major
source of tropical agricultural commodities. Markets in North
America and Europe were relatively accessible and the slave
trade had enormous demographic and cultural impacts. Many
Caribbean islands were deforested early. For example, the forest
cover of Puerto Rico was reduced to only 10 per cent of the
island's land area at the end of the 19th century and most of this
was very disturbed, with coffee bushes planted beneath it.
However, the forest area has increased significantly since (see

A Future for Neotropical Forests

Chapter 15). Similarly in Cuba, most deforestation took place
between 1900 and 1959. with the land being cleared for sugar
cane plantations and for intensive cattle ranching, so that by the
1950s as little as 14 per cent of the forest cover remained (see
Chapter 10).

In the countries of Central America, with the exception of El
Salvador, deforestation has been highest in the past four
decades. In the region as a whole, forests have tended to be
looked upon as an obstacle to development (Utting, 1993). With
the boom in demand for several agricultural products, such as
coffee, that occurred from the 1950s onwards, forests have been
converted to pastures and crop land to reap short-term benefits
with little regard for the long-term sustainability of the produc-
tion systems (Utting. 1993).

Although there was little deforestation for agriculture in the
humid Neotropics compared with that in the Old World tropics,
the commodities that allowed demographic expansion and forest
clearing in Africa and Asia almost all originated in the forests of
South America. Maize, cassava, cacao, yams, rubber and a wide
variety of fruits, which had major ecological impacts in West
Africa and Southeast Asia, all came from the Americas. A fur-
ther irony is that the tropical crops that have been associated
with significant deforestation in the Americas, coffee, sugar and
bananas, all originated in the Old World.

Development and the Environment in the Late 20th Century

The dramatic developments that have occurred in the forests of
the tropical Americas in the past 30—10 years are the main sub-
ject of this Atlas. Few major biomes of the world have suffered
such dramatic change in so short a time. Extrapolation from
limited observation has led people to predict widespread doom
and destruction. Others have pointed out the vastness of the
forests and invoked the sovereign right of nations to develop
their resources to improve the welfare of their populations.

The country chapters in this Atlas provide information on
forest extent and this is summarised here in Table 9.1. For each
country, the total forest area measured from the relevant Map
within this Atlas is given, along with the figure of forest area for
that country from FAO (1993). These two figures are very dif-
ferent in some cases and. for each, the percentage of land area
still covered with tropical forest has been calculated. Maps from
which statistics for total forest cover could be measured were
not obtained for all countries, this was the case for most of the
Caribbean countries and for Panama, Mexico and Peru. As a
result no figure for total forest cover in the Caribbean has been
obtained from the Maps in this Atlas. For Central and South
America, to obtain the total figures, the areas from FAO ( 1993)
have been used for Panama, Mexico and Peru (Table 9. 1 ).

In the other two Atlases in this series, it was possible to obtain
figures for original forest cover in each country, but this has not
been done for The Americas because no potential vegetation
map was found that covered all three regions. It can, however, be
assumed that the Caribbean islands considered here were once
more or less completely covered in forest whereas now only two
(Dominica and Guadeloupe) have more than half left, while
Haiti has lost almost all its forest. Similarly, in Central America,
most of each country, except Mexico, will have been forest cov-
ered (Leonard. 1987); although the driest areas (east-central
Nicaragua and the Oriente Region of Guatemala) will probably
have contained some natural non-forest areas. Now only Belize
has most of its land covered in forest, forest in El Salvador cov-
ers less than 10 per cent of its land. Costa Rica is reduced to only
30 per cent cover, while the other countries on the isthmus all

have between 40 and 50 per cent of their land covered in forest.
In South America, the Guianas are all still more or less totally
covered in forest, while the rest of the countries, other than
Paraguay, have at least 40 per cent of their land covered. It is.
however, more difficult to know the original extent of forest in
these countries. In the case of Brazil, the remaining extent as
estimated by FAO compared to the area measured from Maps
here, is very different. The reason for this is unclear, but is
almost certainly due to the inclusion of open formations in the
figure given by FAO (1993). The difference between the area
measured here and that given by FAO for closed broadleaved
forests (3.871,210 sq. km) is not so great, especially as the figure
measured here is for 1992 as opposed to 1990.

As with the figures for forest area remaining within a coun-
try, estimates of rates of deforestation also vary. Fearnside (see
Box and Chapter 25) has introduced some rigour into the debate
on deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon by attempting to
analyse and interpret the causes of major discrepancies between
some of the earlier estimates.

Along with the extent and speed of deforestation being diffi-
cult to assess, the underlying causes are also subject to varied
interpretation. People's perception of the problem of forest mis-
use is very much influenced by their culture. The perception of
forests by urban North Americans and Europeans is different
from that of the urban rich of Sao Paulo, the favelas dwellers of
Rio, the cattle ranchers of Rondonia or the Indians of the upper
Orinoco. South Americans of all ethnic and social groups have at
various times felt attacked by outside conservationists and devel-
opers whose judgements reflect an alien culture. This has been
manifest in a belief that industrialised nations were promoting an
■■internationalisation" of Amazonia. The contradictory percep-
tions concerning Amazonia are di.scussed in Amazonia Without
Myths (Latin America. Caribbean, Commission on Development
and Environment for Amazonia, nd). Somewhat more analytical
accounts are given in Eden ( 1990) and Mahar ( 1989).

A major focus of debate has been the extent to which govern-
ment policies have acted in a perverse way to promote unsustain-
able and destructive use of forest lands. It is still unclear whether
such policies drove the process of frontier expansion or whether
they simply acted to subsidise the entrepreneurial aspirations of
governing elites. Rich people throughout the tropical Americas
have colonised and cleared land as a speculative venture and as a
potential hedge against high inflation. Poor people have
colonised forests to escape the feudal conditions found in more
accessible agricultural areas, to escape civil strife and political
conflict and to escape the grinding poverty of over-populated
coastal and upland areas. There is increasing evidence that gov-
ernment fiscal measures aimed at encouraging colonisation of
forests have had less real impact than had previously been
thought (see Chapter 7). The single most significant intervention
by governments and outside agencies has been the provision of
infrastructure. Road construction throughout the forests of tropi-
cal America has inevitably been followed by land colonisation
and forest clearance. The extent and pattern of deforestation is
profoundly influenced by the planning and financing of trans-
portation networks. Ministries of Transport are more important
than Ministries of Environment in determining the fate of forests.

Forest colonists of all classes have practised very extensive
agricultural systems and small numbers of people have had a
major, and largely deleterious, impact on forests over large areas.
Most agricultural colonisation has been followed by abandon-
ment of the land as soil nutrient levels declined under low input
farming systems. The only exceptions are in the more prosperous

A Future for Neotropical Forests

Table 9.1 Remaining extent of tropical forest as judged from the country maps in this Athis and by FAO ( 1993).

Country

Lciiul area Remaining Remaining Dale oflhe

(scj. km) e.xlen! of fores! area of forest cover

for 1990 tropical forest data shown i

according to as mapped in tliis Atlas'

FAO 1 1993) this Atlas

in sq. km- isc/. km)

Remaining area of tropical forest
as a iJcrcentage of land area

From FAO
(1993)

CARIBBEAN

Antigua and Barbuda

440

100

22.7

Cuba

110,860

17.150

25.035

date unknown

15.5

Dominica

750

440

58.7

Dominican Republic

48.380

10.770

22.3

Grenada

340

17.7

Guadeloupe

1690

930

55.0

Haiti

27.560

230

0.8

Jamaica

10,830

2.390

3.181

1989

22.0

Martinique

1.060

430

40.6

Puerto Rico

8.860

3,210

36.2

St Kitts and Nevis

272

130

47.8

St Lucia

610

8.2

St Vincent & Grenadines

390

110

28.2

Trinidad and Tobago

5.130

1.550

1.683-

1980

30.2

Total

217.172

37.550

17.3

From map data

22.6

nd
nd
nd

29.4
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd

32.8

CENTRAL AMERICA

Belize

22.800

19.960

18.393

1992

87.5

Costa Rica

5 1 ,060

14.280

15.049

1988

28.0

El Salvador

20.720

1 .230

1.555

1981

5.9

Guatemala

108.430

42,250

48.244

1992

39.0

Honduras

111.890

46.050

52.735"

1990

41.2

Mexico

1.908.690

448.120

448.120'

FAO 1990

23.5

Nicaragua

118.750

60.130

57,450

1990

50.6

Panama

75.990

31,170

31.170

FAO 1990

41.0

Total

2.418.330

663.190

672.716

27.4

SOUTH AMERICA

Bolivia

1,084.390

419.670

451.426

1992

38.7

Brazil

8,456,510

5.322.440

3.415.308

1993

62.9

Colombia

1.038.700

540.460

510.935

1985

52.0

Ecuador

276.840

119.190

142.370

1987

43.0

French Guiana

88,150

79.970

81.490

1979

90.7

Guyana

208.419'

184,160

183,025

1992

93.6

Paraguay

397.300

60.640

47,488"

1985

15.3

Peru

1.280.000

674.340

674,340'

FAO 1990

52.7

Surinam

143.662'

147.680

133,284

1978

94.6'

Venezuela

882.050

454.570

542,682

1982

51.5

Total

13.856.021

8.003.120

6,182,348

57.8

80.7
29.5
7.5
44.5
47.1
23.5
48.4
41.0

27.8

41.6
40.4
49.2
51.4
92.4
87.8
12.0
52.7
92.8
61.5

44.6

The borders between the Guianas are disputed and in this instance we have used figures from Map 23.1 and Map 29.1 rather than FAO's figures of 156.000 sq, km and

196.850 sq. km respectively. Percent cover using FAO's figure for forest area is calculated by using the land area given by FAO.

FAO's figures given here includes the areas of forest within the tropical rain forest zone, the moist deciduous forest zone and the hill and montane zone. Forests in the dry

deciduous forest zone, very dry forest zone and desert zone ha\e not been included as it is inferred that they are open formations, and these are not co\ered in this Atlas.

Trinidad only

Not including mangrove

As ii has not been possible to obtain forest statistics from the Map in this .Atlas, the forest area given b) FAO 1 1993) has been used here.

In Eastern Paraguay only

Where known, this is the actual date of the forest data, rather than the publication date of the source map.

A Future for Neotropical Forests

Climate Changes

Deforestation in Brazilian Amazonia releases gases to the
atmosphere that contribute to global warming. While the re-
leases from current deforestation are significant, the unique fea-
ture of Brazil is the vast area of its forests that still remain
uncut. This makes the potential for future greenhouse gas emis-
sions from Amazonia far greater than for other tropical areas.

Greenhouse gas emissions from Amazonian deforestation
are the subject of considerable controversy. Sources of differ-
ences among the estimates have included wide discrepancies in
the rates of deforestation used in the calculations — a source of
variation that has decreased greatly as errors have been clarified
in some of the deforestation estimates. Another source of the
differences comes from differing estimates for forest biomass.
and part from inappropriate use of existing biomass estimates
(as by using above-ground live biomass for total biomass; see
review in Fearnside er al. 1993). Some estimates, including
Brazil's official estimates at the time of UNCED in Rio de
Janeiro in June 1992, have indicated vei7 low levels of emis-
sions because only gases released from burning at the time of
clearing were considered, while the larger "■inherited" relea.ses
from decay and combustion of the biomass that was left
unbumed in the areas deforested in previous years were omit-
ted. Emissions values also differ depending whether carbon
dioxide alone is considered, or if trace gases such as methane,
carbon monoxide and nitrous oxide are included.

Significant differences can also stem from the way the
global wanning impact of the various trace gases is calculated,
including the treatment of indirect effects and choices of the
time horizon and representation of time preference (such as dis-
counting). Different indices of emissions also contribute to the
variety of estimates. For example, ""net committed emissions""
expresses the effect of clearing in a given year, including
delayed emissions and uptakes, over an infinite or very long
time horizon as the deforested area approaches an equilibrium
replacement landscape, while the ""annual balance of net emis-
sions" expresses the gas fluxes in a single year over the entire
regional landscape (not only the area cleared in a given year).

The net committed emissions from deforestation in 1990
are estimated to be 234 million t of carbon in terms of carbon
dioxide only, and 260-266 million t of CO,-equivalent carbon
for low and high trace gas scenarios if trace gases are includ-
ed using the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) 1992 global warming potentials for direct effects with
a 100-year time horizon and no discounting. The annual bal-
ance was 321-324 million t of carbon for CO, only or
339-371 million t with trace gases. The annual balance for
1990 was higher than the net committed emissions because of

delayed emissions from the period of rapid deforestation in
the 1980s. The annual flux represents approximately 4 per
cent of the global total CO, flux from fossil fuel combustion
and tropical deforestation (Fearnside.n.d.-a, n.d.-b).

Halting global warming cannot be achieved without sig-
nificantly reducing global fossil fuel use. The emissions from
deforestation in Brazil are nevertheless substantial: at the
1990 level, halting deforestation in Brazilian Amazonia
would contribute more to combatting global warming than
doubling the fuel efficiency of all of the automobiles in the
world (see Fearnside, 1992)

While global warming has its greatest impacts outside
Brazil, one of the consequences of widespread Amazonian
deforestation that has the greatest likely impact on Brazil
itself is potential alteration of the water cycle. These changes
threaten the remaining Amazonian forests that are not directly
cleared. In patches of forest isolated by cattle pasture, the
trees on the edges of forest patches die at a much greater rate
than do those in continuous forest (Rankin-de-Merona et al,
1990). Dry conditions in the air or soil near the reserve edges
is a likely explanation for the mortality (Kapos, 1989).

Precipitation in Amazonia is characterized by tremendous
variability from one year to the next, even in the absence of
massive deforestation. Were the forest's contribution to dry
season rainfall to decrease, the result would probably be a very
severe drought once in, say, 20 or 50 years that would kill
many trees of susceptible species. The result would be replace-
ment of the tropical moist forest with more drought-tolerant
forms of scrubby, open vegetation resembling the cemido.
Such a change could set in motion a positive feedback process
leading to less dense forests that transpire less, increasing the
severity of droughts, thereby causing even more tree mortality
and forest thinning (Fearnside, 1985). Simulations incorporat-
ing this feedback indicate large parts of the region becoming
unsuitable for closed forest (Shukla et al. 1990). The reduc-
tions in rainfall potentially affect not only Amazonia but also
Brazil's major agricultural regions in the central-south part of
the country (Salati and Vose, 1984). In addition, drier climatic
conditions are likely to result in fires entering the forest sur-
rounding agriculture and pasture areas, a phenomenon that
already occurs on a more modest scale under present climatic
conditions (Uhl and Buschbacher, 1985).

The example of tropical forest burned in Indonesia during
the El Nino/Southern Oscillation drought of 1982-1983
(Malingreau et al, 1985) serves as a warning of the potential
for much more widespread impact from this source in
Amazonia in the future. Source: Philip Fearnside

regions of Central America (Costa Rica), the forested hinterlands
of Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro, and the forested slopes of the
Andes, where access to markets for cash crops has enabled farm-
ers to develop tree crops and agroforestry systems which are sta-
ble and productive even on poor forest soils. It is claimed that 80
per cent of the forested land cleared for agriculture, especially for
cattle raising, in lowland moist forests is abandoned within 10
years, but there are also plenty of examples of productive and sta-
ble agriculture on forest lands. The success of colonisation has
been conditioned by the selection of sites, the skills and resources
of the colonists and the availability of markets (de Onis, 1992).
Realisation of the severe ecological constraints to develop-

ment in moist forest areas is now widespread. Schemes to
promote large scale deforestation for extensive agriculture are
being viewed with caution in most countries. There is, how-
ever, a growing appreciation that forest lands do have consid-
erable development potential if they are used appropriately.
The promotion of uses which are consistent with the mainte-
nance of biological and environmental values has been a
major focus of lUCN's work in the humid tropics. The princi-
ples are set out in Poore and Sayer (1991) and are retlected in
a resolution adopted by the lUCN General Assembly in Perth.
Australia in 1990. The resolution was adopted without oppo-
sition by lUCN's 450 non-governmental organisation mem-

A Future for Neotropical Forests

bers and by representatives of governments or government
agencies from a furtlier I 14 countries. Its essential message is
that ecologically sound development of some forest areas is
needed to alleviate poverty and thus diminish the pressure for
unsustainable use of more extensive areas. It recognises the
solutions to deforestation as lying in creating industrial
employment and generating wealth for society at large.
Markets must exist for cash crops which will allow small
farmers to invest in the higher input farming systems needed
to achieve sustainability on marginal soils. The resolution is
significant because a broad section of the conservation com-
munity of both Northern and Southern countries recognised
that forests will not be saved by measures to diminish access
to their resources (timber boycotts, etc), but rather by mea-
sures to promote more appropriate use of those resources. The
resolution suggests that attempts by conservation lobbyists to
constrain development of mineral or timber resources in for-
est areas may be counterproductive.

Resources derived from restricted sources (minerals) or from
forest systems (tree crops or timber) are generating wealth and
employment for people who would otherwise practice extensive
agriculture and destroy far more forest. The test of good devel-
opment in the humid tropics is the amount of wealth and
employment it can create per unit area of land; thus the extent to
which it can advance social and economic well-being without
incurring extensive deforestation. These issues are reviewed in
considerable detail in the thought-provoking book The Green
Cathedral (de Onh. 1992).

These ideas are reflected in the UNCED Statement of
Principles on Forests and in Agenda 21. They are also consis-
tent with the revised goals and objectives of the TFAP and the
targets and guidelines established under the International
Tropical Timber Agreement. The translation of these concepts
into practical development options for any specific locality is
much more difficult. The questions of the carrying capacity of
land under different uses are examined for Amazonia by
Fearnside (1986, 1990). The principles of economic zoning are
recognised by several countries in the American tropics. For
instance, a major study of land capability carried out in Brazil
formed the basis of the maps in Chapter 25 (Brazil. Projeto
RADAMBRASIL. 1973-83). Policies promoted by the Amazon
Pact and the Brazil Pilot Project and supported by the major
industrial powers are consistent with this developmental
approach to conservation. The issues addressed in this Atlas and
the information provided for each country attempt to demon-
strate the potential synergies between conservation and develop-
ment at a continental level.

The Future

There is no inherent demand for forest land or forest resources
that need condemn the forests of Amazonia to disappear. The
population density of the region is only a fraction of that found
in tropical Asia. Investments in improved use of land outside
the forests will yield far more than will attempts to extend the
agricultural frontier. This is not true for the Pacific seaboard of
continental South America, nor for parts of Central America and
the Caribbean where population density is much higher. Indeed
in countries such as El Salvador and Haiti it is already largely
too late to save the forests and a major proportion of these coun-
tries' biodiversity is already extinct (Goodland, 1992).

For the Caribbean as a whole, the situation is precarious for
the natural resources, and con.sequently also for the well-being
of the people (Lugo et al. 1981). The islands are mostly small

and densely popiilalctl and there is intense competition tor the
tlat land in particular. The great diversity of forest types compli-
cates the problems of forest management since it is difficult to
develop management techniques which can be applied success-
fully over wide areas (Lugo el al.. 1981). In addition, not only
are there man-made disruptions to the forests, the natural distur-
bances, such as hurricanes, can also cause considerable damage
to the forest.

In some cases, knowledge exists of the sites and management
regimes needed to conserve the region's biodiversity (see
Chapters 3, 4 and 8). In South America at least, there is room to
conserve biodiversity and to allocate adequate forest lands for
sustainable development. There are nutrient rich soils in the
region which could support productive, sustainable and inten-
sive agriculture if technologies and inputs were available. This
could most readily be achieved by more efficient use of the
large area of land that has already been deforested.

Sustainable extraction of forest products, both timber and
non-timber, is consistent with the retention of much of the bio-
logical and environmental value of the forests. It is likely that
this extractivism will gradually disappear as other lifestyle
options become available to its practitioners; but extractivism
may be useful in building a bridge for certain sectors of rural
society into the 21st century (UICN, 1993; Redford and Padoch,
1992). The past practise of spending conservation money on
repressing the activities of hunters and gatherers in pursuit of
protection of pristine ecosystems is no longer viable.
Nevertheless, it is also evident that it may not be possible to
expect the large vertebrates, at least, to survive in a forest where
hunting is unrestrained (see Chapter 5).

We must be cautious, however, in assuming thai the future
will be a linear extrapolation of the past. Fossil fuel reserves are
being depleted, and the climate changes caused by carbon
released during their combustion are becoming intolerable (see
Box). The world is inevitably going to turn more towards
renewable sources of hydrocarbons. Ethanol is already substitut-
ing for fossil oil in Brazil and demand for this product can be
expected to increase in the future. Tropical tree plantations can
produce hydrocarbons, and also fibres, to substitute for tho.se of
the slow growing natural forests and plantations of northern
temperate zones (Sawyer, 1993; Davidson, 1987). The major
reforestation schemes on the llanos of Venezuela and in the
Vale de Rio Doce in Brazil may be a foretaste of the future.
Some see such industrial forest development as a threat to natu-
ral systems; others argue that it will channel development into a
few circumscribed areas and diminish pressure on the bulk of
the forest estate.

We exist at a time when thoughtful people are more and
more concerned at the ever accelerating consumerism and
search for economic growth in the industrialised North. In the
medium term, the single most important requirement for halting
the abuse of forest lands in the tropical Americas is that the
economies of the countries of the region must grow. This must
not be growth at any cost. It must be sustained, consistent
growth of all .sectors of the economy and it must be associated
with greater democracy, improved social facilities (particularly
health and education) and greater predictability of markets.
Virtually everybody agrees that these forests need to be con-
served. The need is to create an economic and social environ-
ment in which this will be possible. As this Atlas is being
finalised, in mid- 1994, there is, at last, the beginning of agree-
ment between tropical and temperate countries that a global
convention on forests might, after all, be in everyone's interest.

A Future for Neotropical Forests

References

Brazil, Projeto RADAMBRASIL (1973-83). Levantamento de
Recursos Naturals Vols 1-23. Ministerio das Minas e
Energia. Departamneto Nacional de Perdagao Mineral, Rin
de Janeiro. Brasil.

David.son, J. (1987). Bioenergy Tree Plantations in the Tropics:
Ecological Implications and Impacts. Commission on
Ecology Paper No 12. lUCN, Gland, Switzerland.

Dourojeanni, M.J. (1990). Amazonia que hacer?. Cenlro de
Estudios Teologicos de la Amazonia, Iquitos. Peru. 444 pp.

de Onis, J. (1992). The Green Cathedral: sustainable develop-
ment of Amazonia. Oxford University Press, Oxford, U.K.

Eden. M.J. (1990). Ecology and Land Management In
Amazonia. Belhaven Press, London. 269 pp.

Feamside, P.M. (1985). Environmental change and deforestation
in the Brazilian Amazon. In: Change in the Amazon Basin:
Man 's Impacts on Forests and Rivers. Pp. 71-88. Hemming. J.
(ed). Manchester University Press, Manchester, U.K. 222 pp.

Fearnside. P.M. (1986). Human Carrying Capacity of the
Brazilian Rainforest. Columbia University Press. New York,
E.U.A. 293.

Fearnside, P.M. (1990). Predominant land uses in the Brazilian
Amazon. In: Alternatives to Deforestation: Towards
Sustainable Use of the Amazon Rain Forest. Pp. 235-251.
Anderson. A.B. (ed.). Columbia University Press, New York.
281 pp.

Fearnside, P.M. (1992). Greenhouse Gas Emissions from
Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Carbon Emissions
and Sequestration in Forests: Case Studies from Developing
Countries. Volume 2. LBL-32758, UC-402. Climate Change
Division, Environmental Protection Agency. Washington,
DC and Energy and Environment Division, Lawrence
Berkeley Laboratory (LBL), LIniversity of California (UC),
Berkeley, California. 73 pp.

Fearnside, P.M. (n.d.-a). Greenhouse gases from deforestation
In Brazilian Amazonia: Net committed emissions.
Unpublished manuscript.

Fearnside, P.M. (n.d.-b). Amazonia and global warming:
Annual balance of greenhouse gas emissions from land use
change in Brazil Amazon region. Unpublished manuscript.

Fearnside, P.M., Leal. N. and Fernandes, P.M. (1993).
Rainforest burning and the global carbon budget: Biomass.
combustion efficiency and charcoal formation in the
Brazilian Amazon. Journal of Geophysical Research 98:
16,733-16,743.

Goodland. R.J. A. (1992). Neotropical moist forests: priorities
for the next two decades. In: Conservation of Neotropical
Forests: working from traditloncd resource use. Redford,
K.H. and Padoch. C. (eds). Columbia University Press. New
York. Pp. 475.

Haffer, J. (1969). Speciation in Amazonian forest birds. Science
165: 131-137.

lUCN/UNEPAVWF (1980). World Consen'ation Strategy: liv-
ing resource conservation for sustainable development.
lUCN, Gland, Switzerland.

lUCN/UNEP/WWF ( 1991 ) Caring for the Earth: a strategy for
sustainable living. lUCN, Gland, Switzerland.

Kapos, V. (1989). Effects of isolation on the water status of for-

est patches in the Brazilian Amazon. Journal of Tropical
Ecology 5: 173-185.

Latin America. Caribbean. Commission on Development and
Environment for Amazonia (nd). Amazonia Without Myths.
Inter-American Development Bank, Washington, D.C. 99 pp.

Leonard. H.J. (1987). Natural Reso:irces and Economic
Development in Central America: A Regional Environmental
Profile. International Institute for Environment and
Development. Transaction books, Oxford, U.K.

Lugo, A.E.. Schmidt, R. and Brown, S. (1981). Tropical forests
in the Caribbean. Amblo 10(6); 318-324.

Mahar, D.J. (1989). Government Policies and Deforestation in
Brazil's Amazon Region. The World Bank. Washington. D.C.

Malingreau. J. P., Stephens, G. and Fellows, L. (1985). Remote
sensing of forest fires: Kalimantan and North Borneo in
1982-83. AmWo 17( 1 ): 314-321.

McNeeley, J. A. (1994). Lessons from the past: forests and bio-
diversity. Biodiversity' and Conservation 3: 3—20.

Prance, G.T. (1982). Forest refuges: evidence from woody
angiosperms. In: Biological Diversification in the Tropics.
Prance. G.T. (ed.). Columbia University Press, New York:
pp. 137-157.

Poore, D. and Sayer, J. (1991). The Management of Tropical
Moist Forest Lands: Ecological Guidelines. Second edition.
lUCN. Gland. Switzerland and Cambridge. UK. 78 pp.

Rankin-de-Merona, J.M., Hutchings, R.W. and Lovejoy, T.E.
(1990). Tree mortality and recruitment over a five-year pe-
riod in undisturbed upland rainforest of the Central Amazon.
In: Four Neotropical Rainforests. Pp. 573-584. Gentry, A.H.
(ed.) Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut, U.S.A.

Redford, K.H. and Padoch. C. (1992). Conservation of
Neotropical Forests. Colombia University Press.

Salati. E. and Vose, P.B. (1984). Amazon Basin: a system in
equiWbv'ium. Science 115: 129-138.

Sawyer, J. (1993). Plantations In the Tropics: Environmental
Concerns. lUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, U.K.
83 pp.

Shukla. J., Nobre, C. and Sellers, P. (1990). Amazon deforesta-
tion and climate change. Science 247: 1322-1325.

UICN (1993). El E.xtractlvlsino en Atnerlca Latino.
Recomendaclones del Taller UlCN-CEE. Amacayacu,
Colombia, Octubre. 1992. Ruiz Perez, M., Sayer, J. and
Cohen Jehoram, S. (Eds). lUCN. Gland, Switzerland and
Cambridge, UK.

Uhl, C. and Buschbacher. R. (1985). A disturbing synergism
between cattle-ranch burning practices and selective tree har-
vesting in the eastern Amazon. Biotropica 17(4): 265-268.

Utting, P. (1993). Trees, people and power. Earthscan
Publications Ltd, London.

WCED (1987). Our Common Future (Bruntland Report).
Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.

Author: Jeff Sayer, Centre for International Forestry Research.
Bogor, Indonesia, with contributions from Marc Dourojeanni,
Inter American Development Bank; Philip Fearnside, INPA.
Manuas, Brazil and W. Veening, European Working Group in
Amazonia, Amsterdam, Netherlands

PART II

10 Cuba

Country area 1 1 0,860 sq. km

Land area 110,860 sq. km

Population (mid- 1994) 111 million

Population growth rate 8 per cent

Population projected to 2025 1 2.9 million

Gross national product per capita ( 1 992) US$24S8

Forest cover, dote unknown (see IVIop) 25,035 sq. km

Forest cover for 1 990 (FAO, 1 993) 1 7, 1 50 sq km

Annual deforestation rote 1 98 1 -1 990 10 per cent

Industrial roundwood production 61 1 ,000 cu. m

Industrial roundwood exports —

Fuelwood and charcoal production 2,529,000 cu m

Processed wood production 279,000 cu m

Processed wood exports 21 ,000 cu m

•c^

, t

The islanii of Cuba is the largest of the Caribbean islancis. accounting for over half the lancJ area of the Antilles and, as
such, has the greatest area of forest remaining on it. Nevertheless, only around 1 5 to 20 per cent of the island is for-
ested. Most forest destruction has occurred in the last hundred years, with cattle pasture and sugar cane plantations
replacing the forests. There is little tradition of conservation in Cuba, but recent efforts, including a law for the protec-
tion of the environment and the rational use of natural resources, have established the basis for success in preserving
the remaining flora and fauna.

Introduction

The Republic of Cuba comprises the main island of Cuba, 1300
km long and 190 km wide with an area of 104,945 sq. km, the
Isla de la Juventud (formerly the Isla de Pinos) covering 2200
sq. km, and some 1600 further small cays and islands.

Topographically, the island of Cuba consists of three main
regions: the plains, foothills and the highland area. The plains
make up two thirds of the island. There are four principal moun-
tain systems, which are, from west to east, the Guaniguanico
system, the Guamuhaya system, the Sierra Maestra system
(which contains Pico Real the highest point in the country at
1974 m), and the extensive Sagua-Baracoa massif.

The mean annual temperature is about 24.5°C, with a mean
minimum of 10°C and mean maximum of 35°C. January is the
coldest month and July the hottest. The main rainy season is
from May to October. Mean annual precipitation in most areas
is in the range 1 100-1600 mm, but some places receive as little
as 300 mm and some as much as 3000 mm rainfall in a year
(Capote <-?c//., 1989).

The island is thought to have been inhabited since 6000 BP
although it was reportedly only sparsely populated when the
Spaniards first settled in the 16th century. Estimates for the pre-
Colombian population vary from 200,000 to 1,000,000. Within
50 years of Spanish settlement, the indigenous inhabitants had
been almost entirely exterminated by epidemics. Until the 19th
century Spanish settlements were largely concentrated along the
north-west coast in and around Havana, the country's capital.
The country has remained largely urban and at present 73 per
cent of the population live in towns with Havana having a popu-
lation of over 2 million. Overall population density is quite low
at 100 people per sq. km, but around half the people live in less
than 10 per cent of the island.

Arable land occupies 44,000 sq. km of the island and 24,000
sq. km is permanent pasture (MINAG. 1991). Principal exports
are sugar, minerals, tobacco, citrus fruit and fish.

The Forests

The variable topography, geology and climate of Cuba together
with the effects of humans, particularly in the past century, have
resulted in the existence of a wide and complex range of vegeta-
tion types. The impact of humans has in many cases made it
very difficult to identify and classify the original vegetation
cover (Smith, 1954). For this reason, the extent of original for-
est cover remains a matter of conjecture, with estimates varying
from 60 per cent (Smith, 1954) to 90 per cent of the country
(Anon., 1992). Existing forests on the island are divided princi-
pally into rain, cloud, semi-deciduous, swamp, gallery, man-
grove and pine (Capote et ai. 1989). Original forest cover is
believed to have been largely evergreen and semi-deciduous,
the latter particularly frequent in central and western regions
(Borhidi and Muni'z, 1980).

The typical rain forest formations occur below 400 m in close
association with river valleys in the northeast extremity of Cuba.
Three tree strata are present with heights ranging between 15 and
35 m. Carapa giiianensis is dominant in the first stratum, other
important tree species are CalophyUum utile. Biichenavia capita-
te. Manilkara albescens, Micropolis polita and Terminalia
nipensis. In the second storey are Ochroma pyramidale , Guarea
guidonia, Oxandra laiirifolia. Diospyros caribaea and the palms
Prestoea montana and Calyptronoma orientalis (Capote et al.
1989). Tree ferns, lianes and epiphytes are abundant.

Lowland seasonal rain forests formerly occupied the most
extensive areas in the island. Although this forest type is still
widespread on Cuba, it is rarely found in undisturbed stands and
much has been replaced by agricultural land. Two canopy layers
are found, at 20-25 m and at 8-15 m, typically with emergents
of the deciduous species Ceibu pentandra. Common trees of the
upper canopy are Roystonea regia. Guaz.uina uhnifolia. Biicida
biiceras. Chloropliora tincloria. Cordia collococca. Ficus spp.
and Saiiianea saiiian. In the lower storey Oxandra lanceolata.

Cuba

AieraiiiiiKs lucidtis. Andirci inennis and Cicscentia ciijetc are
charatlerislic (Borhidi. 1991 ).

Between 400 and 900 m elevation in the distal and Moa Mts
and in the valleys of the Nipe Mts are serpentine rain forests
with an open upper canopy at 15-22 m composed of such
species as Calophylluni mile. Podocarpiis ekmanii. Dipholis
jubilla. Ocolea leiicoxylon and Byrsonima coriacea. often
mixed with Piniis cuhensis. The lower stratum is only ? to 12 m
high and has species such as Bactris cuhensis. Tetru;,yf>ia
crislaleiisis. Topiira cuhensis. Byrsoninia hifloni and lle.x heri-
eroi within it (Borhidi. 1991 ).

Sub-montane rain forests occur in the Moa Mts and in the
Toa, Jaguani and Duaba Basins. The upper canopy layer, at
.^0-35 m. is closed and is composed of Canipa guianensis. and
only rarely mixed with other species. The second storey, with a
canopy at 20-25 m high, is composed of Calophylluni iirile.
Sloaneu curarellifolia. Dipholis jubilla. Guarea guidonia.
Cupania aniericana. Buchenavia capitata. Ficus wrighlii and
Royslonea regia. Palms such as Bactris cuhensis and Prestoea
monlana are commonly found along creeks. The third canopy
layer is 6-15 m high and Oxandra lanceolala. Cordia sulcata
and Miconia elata are some of the characteristic species.

The submontane seasonal forests occur between 200 and 800 m
in altitude. They are similar to the lowland seasonal forests in
structure but tree composition differs from those forests and
between the mountains (Borhidi. 1991 ).

Montane forest is the climax vegetation over 800 m altitude
in Sierra Maestra, Escambray Mts and SieiTa del Purial and in
some areas of Moa, Sierra del Crista and Baracoa. It is 20-25 m
high with a closed upper canopy. Species found in this storey
include Magnolia cuhensis. Ocotea cuneata. O. leucoxylon. O.
florihunda. Myrsine coriacea and Cyrilla racemiflora .
Characteristic species of the second tree layer include Clusia

telrastigina. Alchornea latijolia. Garrya fadycnii. Miconia
punctata and tree ferns such as Cyathea arborea and C. cuhen-
sis (Borhidi, 1991 |. Epiphytes are abundant in both storeys.

Cloud forests in Cuba are confined to the high altitude
regions of Sierra Maestra and to the high mountains of the Pico
Turquino and Pico Bayamesa group between 1600 and 1900 m.
The canopy layer is dense and closed but only 6-12 m high.
Some of the characteristic species of this layer are Myrsine
inicrophylla. Nectandra reticularis. Sapiuin maestrense. Persea
anomala. Syinplocos leonis. Cyrilla racemiflora. Weininannia
pinnata. Torralbasia cuneifolia. Alsophila aspera and
Lophosoria quadripinnata (Borhidi. 1991). There is also a
dense, almost impenetrable shrub layer. Orchids and bryophytes
are common.

Coniferous forests are restricted to the eastern and western
ends of the island where they are the dominant vegetation type.
In the Sierra Maestra. Pinus occidentalis is found between 900
and 1500 m. In western Cuba. Pinus carihaea predominates. P.
tropicalis is also present and often associated with Colpothrinax
wrightii (Capote ct til.. 1989).

Mangroves

Mangroves, of which Cuba is estimated to have around 5300 sq.
km (IFF. 1989; Padron et al.. 1993). the tenth largest area in the
world, constitute roughly one quarter of the country's existing
forest domain (Anon., 1992). The mangroves shown on Map
10.1 cover an area of 7665 sq. km, a somewhat larger figure
than that reported by IFF ( 1989) and other authors. They form
zones 2-3 km wide along Cuba's shallow muddy beaches. The
largest extent is in the Peninsula de Zapata. In the intertidal
zone. Rhizopliora mangle forms a belt between low tide and
mid tide levels, whereas Avicennia nitida is dominant between
mid and high tide levels. Lagiincularia racemosa may be inter-

Buanahacabibe^^;^^

^Mogotes S9^

22° N

Peninsula

Fl Ueral _^

' JuventLl(d'

Punta Frances - Punta Pederale;

20°N

CARIBBEAN SEA

84°W

GOLEO DE

B?°W

80°W_

Cuba

mingled with Avicennia in some stands. In the uppermost sec-
tions of the intertidal region the extremely salt-resistant species
Conocarpus ereclus forms pure stands or may be mixed with
Avicennia and Laguncularia.

Mangroves have traditionally played a very important role in
the forest economy of the country and have recently become a
focus of reafforestation efforts. Between 1988 and 1990 nearly
180 million mangrove seedlings were planted, mostly of red
mangrove Rhizi'plioia mangle (Anon., 1992).

Table 10.1 Cuba's

forest estate in 1991

Forest

Area in sq. km

Total forest resource"

28,198

Total forested

20.185

Natural forest

17,103

Plantation

3,082

Deforested area

3,090

Non-forest

4,923

Forest Resources and Management

Cuba's forest estate was estimated by the country's Ministry of
Agriculture (MINAG, 1991) and the total area of natural forest
was reported to be 17,103 sq. km (see Table 10.1). In Cuba's
country report to the 1992 United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development (UNCED). the area of natural
forests was given as 16.882 sq. km (Anon.. 1992 and see Table
10.4). FAO (1993) gives the similar figure of 17,150 sq. km of
forest, distributed between the rain ( 1 140 sq. km), moist decidu-
ous (12,470 sq. km), dry deciduous (20 sq. km) and hill and
montane zones (3520 sq. km). The area of closed broadleaved
forest is also given as 17,150 sq. km (FAO. 1993). therefore in
this instance the dry deciduous forest has been included in the
statistics at the head of the chapter.

The forests shown on Map 10.1 cover 25.035 sq. km. distrib-
uted within the forest types as indicated in Table 10.2. This is a
somewhat higher figure than that given in Tables 10.1 and 10.4
or by FAO ( 1993). It is unclear when or how the data were col-
lected for the source map. which was published in 1989 in the
Nuevo Atlas Nacional tie Cuba (see Map legend). It is. there-
fore, quite probable that the forest cover shown on Map 10. 1 is
an overestimate of the present day situation. Another reason for
the differences may. as usual, be the definitions of "forest"

Forest resource covers all areas slated lor forest development purposes, including some
deforested and some non.forested areas.
Source: MINAG (1991)

used. For instance. FAO (1993) indicates that all the forest in
Cuba is closed broadleaved forest (the figure in Table 5c of
Forest resources assessment J 990 for closed broadleaved forest
is the same as that for Cuba's total forest in this and other tables
in the same publication), whereas the source map shows conifer
forests which, when measured on Map 10. 1, cover 2719 sq. km.
It is also not clear whether mangroves are included as forest in
MINAG (199n.

Policies for forest resource use are formulated by the
National Institute for Forest Development (INDAF) and the
forested land is overseen by the Forest Administration within
the Ministry of Agriculture (MINAG). There are separate
departments for silviculture, protection of forests and fauna and
industrial forestry, while forest inventories are carried out by a
different unit.

Forest inventories were carried out in the 1960s in two
phases, the first, running from 1 96 1 to 1963. covered pine forest
while the second, from 1966 to 1970, covered broadleaved

Cerro Galanox/

Map 10.1 Cuba

Forests

Lowland moist

Submontane

Montane

Swamp

Mangrove

Pine

Conservation areas
Non forest

1:3,500,000

t//////i •

50 100

-J 1 — <—

Cauto •Cuge«i|iel Norti

Ga^ Loma de la Men^ura S^pji^ri '

#e# .p lParna>trM:o

<i,'Ml ^0 SantagQ,(daGyba

Desembarco del Gi|anma ^S^—~^^^-^ TTn^a,, ^^^ Sx_?!V C3 #

?'8°W

150

l60 miles

JO km

Arenas Blancas
Alto de Iberli

Ls BsvsmGss ~~~ — '^^ — ' i

76 °W ^'^"^'^^'^ Haljbonjco Tacre PandeAzucar

Yr^utAi Negra - Punia Quemados

74°W

Cuba

Table 10.2 Estimates of forest extent in Cuba

forest type

Area (sq. km)

% land urea

Lowland moist

7.833

7.1

Sub-Montane

2.513

2.3

Montane

716

0.6

Pine

2.719

2.5

Inland Swamp

3.589

3.2

Mangrove

7.665

6.9

Total 25.035 22.6

Based on analysis of Map 1 0. 1 - See Map Legend on p. 101 tor delai Is ol soiiree

forests. In 1973 the results of this were used to draw up a
national forest census. This led to the development of a forest
management strategy under whose aegis have been drawn up
plans for the exploitation and development of the forest
resource. These plan.s were complete at local and provincial
level by 1985 (CIF, 1985). Elaboration of a national forest plan
(the Plan de Accion Forestal Para Cuba) was begun in 1989.
The ultimate aim is to .see 23-25 per cent of the country forested
(MINAG. 1991), compared with the current level of about 18
per cent ( 15 per cent natural forest and 3 per cent plantations).

Reafforestation has proceeded actively since 1959. Both
plantation forestry and enrichment planting are used. Between
1959 and 1983 just over 2000 sq. km o{ plantation were estab-
lished, with a total of nearly 1.4 X 109 trees planted (CIF. 1985).
Roughly the same number of trees is reported to have been
planted between 1985 and 1990 (MINAG, 1991). In 1987 a new
scheme, known as Plan Manati was launched. This has involved
massive popular participation and is particularly concerned with
the planting of fruit and coffee trees in marginal agricultural
land (IFF. 1989). Of the total planted up to 1983, around 37 per
cent were conifers, mainly Piniis carihaea. 12 per cent
Eucalyptus, 15 per cent Casuarina and 36 per cent broadleaved
trees. Some 64 species of broadleaf have been planted, of which
the most abundant are mahogany (Swietenia inacrophylla. S.
mahuatini and Khaya nyasica), cedar Ceclrela odorata, blue
mahoe Hibiscus elatits and Ccilo/diylliim hrasilense var cmtil-
laiuiin. Most of the broadleaf species are used for enrichment
planting rather than for plantation forestry (CIF. 1985).

Because of previous overexploitation and lack of forest man-
agement, the standing crop of timber is relatively low, averag-
ing 47.6 cu. m per ha. Mature hardwood trees are now very rare.
Around 70 per cent of total wood volume is in stands less than
30 years old; for coniferous species this proportion increases to
84 per cent (CIF. 1985).

As of 1985 there were 105 sawmills. Just under half of tim-
ber harvested in 1983 was hardwood. Thinnings, mostly from
plantations, but since 1979 also from natural forests, are a major
source of construction wood in rural areas as well as firewood
and charcoal. Casuarina is used mainly for sugar refineries and
for charcoal production (CIF, 1985).

Deforestation

FAO (1988) estimated that Cuba had one of the lowest net
annual deforestation rates (0.2 per cent) in Latin America
between 1981 and 1985. However, the latest figures from FAO
(1993) itidicate that between the years of 1981 and 1990, Cuba
lost forest at a rate of I per cent per annum, an annual loss of
173 sq. km. As can be seen from Tabic 10.3, forest cover actu-

ally increased between 1959 and 1987, although this is mostly
through an increase in the extent of plantations. Between 1900
and 1959 the country suffered very serious deforestation and
forest degradation, with forest cover decreasing from about 54
per cent in 1900 to 14 per cent in 1959. Western Cuba was the
most degraded region. Much of the destruction was due to clear-
ing land for intensive cattle raising and sugar cane plantations.
The forests themselves were also seriously over-exploited, with
more than 130 species regularly used by the commercial timber
trade and areas often clear-felled for firewood and charcoal.
Forest fires have also had an important impact, particularly in
the pine forests where they inhibit natural regeneration. Overall
this has resulted in there being very few mature forest stands
remaining on the island (Anon.. 1992; CIF, 1985; Smith, 1954).

Biodiversity

Cuba has the highest species diversity and the highest degree of
endemism in the West Indies. Just over 50 per cent of the flora
and 32 per cent of the vertebrate fauna are endemic. The island
has an estimated 6200 species of tlowering plants, 450 verte-
brates and 7500 insects and arachnids (Santana. 1991 ).

Among the best represented plant families are Poaceae,
Asteraceae, Rubiaceae. Euphorbiaceae, Orchidaceae and
Leguminosae (Capote el al.. 1989; Vales et al.. 1992). There are
no endemic families but over 70 endemic genera. Most of the
endemic taxa are found in the montane regions; in the east, the
flora of the Sagua-Baracoa montane system is 80 per cent
endemic. The second highest number of endemics is found on
the Cordillera of Guaniguanico in the west.

Almost all the amphibians on Cuba (36 of 41) are endemic
(WCMC, 1992), but little is known of their status. Excluding
marine turtles, there are 100 reptile species on the island, with
79 endemics (WCMC. 1992; Garrido and Jaume, 1984). Four of
these reptile species have been assigned lUCN threatened
species categories: the Cuban tree boa Epicrates angulifcr
(Indeterminate) and the Cuban crocodile Crocodylus rhomhifer
(Endangered), both endemic, the comparatively widespread
American crocodile Crocodylus acutus (Vulnerable) and the
Cuban ground iguana Cycliira nuhila (Vulnerable), which also
occurs on the Cayman Islands (Groombridge, 1993).

There are 159 breeding bird species recorded in the country,
22 are endemic (WCMC, 1992), Collar et al. (1992) list 13
threatened birds in Cuba, of which nine are endemic. Of the
endemics, the forest living species are Gundlach's hawk
Accipiter gundlachi, the blue-headed quail dove Starnoenas
cyanocephala and the giant kingbird Tyrannus cuhensis. The
ivory-billed woodpecker Cainpephilus principalis, which for-
merly also occurred in the south-eastern USA, is the most
endangered bird on the island and may even now be extinct.

The surviving native mammalian fauna is a relict of that
which is believed to have existed before human settlement. It is

Table 10.3 Forest cover in Cuba between 1S12 and 1987

Year Forested area (sq. km)* Per cent forested

1812 99.0(){) 89

1900 60.()()0 54

19.59 15.()0() 14

1987 2().()0() 18

■ ineludes pkintalions

Source-: Adapted from MINAG ( l')yi)

Cuba

difficult to be precise about the number of extant species as the
taxonomy of the most important non-volant group, the hutias
(family Capromyidae, order Rodentia). is uncertain. Estimates
for the number of recent species, all in the genus Capromys,
vary from four (Morgan and Woods, 1986) to ten (Woods,
1989). Of the latter all except two are listed as threatened by
lUCN and several, which have only been recorded on a few
cays and islets, may already be extinct (Groombridge, 1993).
The only other native terrestrial mammal is the Cuban solen-
odon Solenodon ciihamis. a large, primitive, endemic insecti-
vore confined to montane rainforests in the east and classified as
Endangered by lUCN.

There are around 25 bat species on Cuba, of which 3 are
endemic (Monnoprenis ininittiis. Phyllops fakatiis and Lasiitriis
insiilaris): the Cuban flower bat Phyllonycreiis poevi. also
recorded on Hispaniola, is listed by lUCN as possibly threat-
ened (Groombridge, 1993).

There are 23 recorded freshwater fish species in Cuba, all
except two {Ophisternon aenigmaticuiu and Gambusia punctic-
ulata) are endemic. Some of these are apparently highly local-
ized (Lee et al., 1983). The number of invertebrates is unknown,
four butterflies iPapilio caigiianahiis. Anetia hriarea, A. cubana
and A. pantheratiis) and one dragonfly [Hypolestes trinitatis)
are listed as threatened by lUCN (Groombridge, 1993).

Conservation Areas

The protection status of the forests as of 1990 is outlined in
Table 10.4.

This classification follows a decree promulgated in 1988
which divided all forests into two types: production forests and
protection forests, with several different categories of the latter
(enumerated in the table above).

The first national park (Pico Crystal) was established in 1930
and five more protected areas were established between then
and 1958 with a further nine gazetted in 1959.

The National Network of Protected Areas in Cuba was estab-
lished in 1981 and there are now around 100 conservation areas
that cover approximately 20 per cent of the land, but only a few
of these are strictly protected. Categories within the national
network of conservation areas are national park, natural reserve,
national monument, faunal refuge and "other categories". There
are, however, no clear definitions of the management of each
type of area (lUCN, 1992) and the network does not function as
a structured national system (Ottenwalder in litt.. 1993). Those
areas in lUCN's categories I-IV are listed in Table 10.5.

Table 10.4 The status of forest in Cuba in 1990

Status

Area (sq. km)
total natural plaiiln

PRODUCTION FOREST

6.549

4.500

2.049

PROTECTION FOREST

13.661

12.382

1.279

National parks

1 .003

794

209

Recreational areas

252

1.14

118

Areas for fauna conservation

5,372

5,213

159

National reserves

515

501

Protection of water and soils

2,842

2,217

625

Shoreline protection

3.677

3.523

154

Total

20,210

16,882

3328

Table 10.5 Conservation areas of Cuba

Existing protected areas in lUCN's categories I-IV are listed below.
Marine national parks are not listed or mapped. For information on
Biosphere Reserves see Chapter 8.

liiiiial Parks

Area (sq. km)

Desembarco del Granma*

258

Gran Piedra*

La Bayamesa*

165

Pico Cristal*

150

Punta Frances - Punta Pederales*

174

Turquino*

175

Vifiales*

134

Sonne: Anon. (1992)

Ecolngical Resen'es

Los Indies* 33

Mogotes de Jumagua 4

Punta Negra - Punta Quemados* 40

Natural Reserves

Cabo Corrientes* 16

Cupeyal del Norte* 103

El Veral* 75

Imi'as 26

Jaguani'* 49

Loma de la Mensura* 24

Tacre 12

Managed Flora Reser\'es

Arenas Blancas+ 15

Cayo Caguanes/Cayos de Piedra* 15

Cerro Galano 28

Cuabal Tres Ceibas* 4

El Toldo* 56

Lomas de Galindo 6

Monte Ramonal 26

Pan de Azijcar* 3

Parnaso - Los Montes* 95

Faunal Refuges

Alto de Iberia* 57

Cayo Cantiles* 38

Cayos de Ana Maria* 69

Delta del Cauto* 600

Hatibonico* 52

Las Salinas* 318

OjitodeAgua* 37

Ri'o Maximo+ 100

Santo Tomas* 148

Total 3,139

* Area with forest within its boundaries as shown on Map 10. 1
+ not mapped

Source: WCMC (unpublished data)

Cuba

Forests are protected uitliiit the Vinales National Park. A view of the Vindles Valley.

(WWF/Vithal Rujan)

Legislation for protected areas management is laid down in
Law 33 of 1981 for the Protection of the Environment and
Rational Use of Natural Resources and Decree No. 67 of 1983.
Under these regulations, natural reserves are managed by the
Cuban Academy of Sciences, national parks, faunal refuges and
hunting or game areas by the Directorate for the Protection of
Fauna and Flora of the Ministry of Agriculture, national monu-
ments by the Ministry of Culture and 'natural and touristic
areas" by the National Institute of Tourism.

Cuban conservation policies are directed by the National
Commission for Environmental Protection and Rational Use of
Natural Resources (COMARNA).

Initiatives for Conservation

The major initiative at present is a large-scale conservation and
sustainable development project which is being implemented in
eastern Cuba. This is the Gran Parque Nacional Siena Maestro,

which is a multiple use area in the provinces of Granma,
Santiago de Cuba and Guantanamo covering 5280 sq. km; 64
per cent is government land and the rest private. The area has its
own management authority and legislation and is administered
and managed by a Ruling Commission which is assisted by a
Technical Advisory Council formed by a number of
Government Ministries and agencies. Within the area there are
three national parks (Desembarco del Granma, Turquino and La
Gran Piedra), nine faunal refuges, nine natural reserves, four
natural tourist areas and 28 tourist sites. An environmental edu-
cation programme has been implemented in primary schools in
the area. Ecologically sound projects on beekeeping, forestry,
aquaculture and the production of cacao, coffee and fruit trees
have been started and incentives to persuade peasants to form
production cooperatives and move off the hillsides to less frag-
ile areas are being provided (Santana, 1991).

References

Anon. ( 1992). Cnha. Country report to UNCED, Rio de Janiero,
Brazil.

Borhidi. A, (1991 ). Phytof^eofiraphy ami Vei^etation Ecology of
Cuba. Akademiai Kiado, Budapest.

Borhidi. A. and Mufifz. O. (1980). Die vegetationskarte von
Kuba. Acta Botanica Hungarica 26: 25-53.

Capote, R.P., Berazain, R. and Leiva, A. (1989). Cuba. In:
Floristic Inventory of Tropical Countries: The Status of Plant
Systematics, Collections, and Vegetation, plus
Recommendations for the Future. Campbell, D.G. and

Hammond. D. (Eds). The New York Botanical Garden. New

York. Pp. 315-335.
CIF ( 1985). Breve Caracterizacion de la Actividad Forcstal en

Cuba. Centro de Investigacion Forestal. Ministerio de la

Agricultura, La Habana. Cuba.
Collar. N.J., Gonzaga, L.P., Krabbe, N., Madrofio Nieto, A.,

Naranjo. L.G.. Parker III. T.A. and Wege. D.C. (1992).

Threatened Birds of the Americas. The ICBP/IUCN Red Data

Book. ICBP, Cambridge. U.K.
IFF (1989). Breve Caracterizacion de la Actividad Forestal en

100

Cuba

Cuba. Institute de Investigaciones Forestales, Centre de
Informacion y Documentacion Agropecuario. La Habana.
Cuba.

FAO (1988). An Inlerim Report on the State of the Forest
Resources in the Developing Countries. FAO, Rome, Italy.

FAO (1993). Forest resource assessment 1990: tropical coun-
tries. FAO Forestry Paper 1 12. FAO, Rome. Italy.

Garrido. O.H. and Jaume, M.L. (1984). Catalogo descriptivo de
los anfibios y reptiles de Cuba. Donana Acta Vertebrata 1 1
(2): 1-128.

Groombridge, B. (Ed) (1993). 1994 lUCN Red List of
Threatened Animals. lUCN, Gland, Switzerland and
Cambridge. U.K. 286 pp.

lUCN (1992). Protected Areas of the World: A review of
national systems. Volume 4: Nearctic and Neotropical.
lUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, U.K.

Lee, D.S., Platania, S.P., Burgess, G.H. (1983). Atlas of North
American Freshwater Fishes. 1983 Supplement. North
Carolina Biological Survey Constribution No. 1983-6.

MINAG (1991 ). PIcm de Accion Forestal para Cuba: documen-
to base. Ministerio de la Agricultura, Ciudad de la Habana.
Cuba.

Morgan, G.S. and Woods, C.A. (1986). Extinction and the zoo-
geography of West Indian land mammals. Biological Journal
— Linnean Societ}' 28: 167-203.

Padron, CM., Llorente, S. and Menendez. L. (1993).
Mangroves of Cuba. In; Conservation and Sustainable
Utilization of Mangrove Forests in Latin America and Africa
Regions. Part I: Latin America. ITTO/ISME Project
PD114/90(F). Pp. 147-154.

Santana, E. (1991). Nature conservation and sustainable devel-
opment in Cuba. Conservation Biology 5(1): 13—16.

Smith, E.E. (1954). The Forests of Cuba. Maria Moors Cabot
Foundation Publication No. 2.

Vales, M.A., Monies, L. and Alayo, R. (1992). Estado del
conocimiento de la biodi versidad en Cuba. In: La
Biodiversidad Biologica de Iberamerica. Halffter, G. (Ed.).
Acta Zoologica Mexicana (n.s.). Programa Iberoamericano
de Ciencia y Tecnologia para el Desarrollo.

WCMC (1992). Global Biodiversity: Status of the Earth's
Living Resources. Chapman and Hall, London xx + 594pp.

Woods, C.A. (1989). Endemic rodents of the West Indies: the
end of a splendid isolation. In: Rodents: A World Survey of
Species of Conservation Concern. Lidicker Jr., W.Z. (Ed.).
Occasional Papers of the lUCN Species Survival
Commission, No. 4.

Authors: Martin Jenkins and Caroline Harcourt, Cambridge
with contributions from Jose Ottenwalder, Florida State
Museum and Julio Figueroa-Colon, International Institute of
Tropical Forestry. Puerto Rico.

Map 10.1 Cuba

Forest data for Cuba have been digitised from the Nuevo Alius Nacional de Cuba: X Flora y
VegeiacUm: I Vegetation Actual l;l minion Academia de Ciencias de Cuba (1989). The vege-
tation map was prepared by Capoie Lopez. R.P.. Ricardo Napoles, N.E., Gonzalez Areu. A.V..
Garcia Rivera. E,E,. Vilamajo Alberdi. D. and Urbino Rodriguez. J.

There are 32 vegetation types depicted on the source map. Out of these. 17 classes (listed
below), classified under Vegeiacidn Natural (natural vegetation), have been digitised to illus-
trate the forests on Map 10. 1 ,

1. Basques Tropicales Latifolios (Perennif olios and Subperennifolios): Pluvial — de huja
aliiiud (nienor de 400 ni). Siempreverde — mesojUu de baja altitud (menor de 400 m).
microfilo cosiero subcostero (monie seco) and Semideciduo — mesofilo rfpico — have been
classified as lowland moist forest: Pluvial — submoniano (400-800 m). and Siempreverde —
mesofilo submontano (400-800 mi — classified as submontane forest; Pluvial — montano
(800-1600 ml Nublado — lipico (1600-1900 m) and Nuhlado — bajo. sobre serpeniinita
(800-1300 m) — classified as montane forest: Siempreverde — de cienaga tipico & bajo and
Semideciduo — mesofilo con humedad fiucluanle — inland swamp forest: and mangroves
were digitised directly from the Siempreverde — de mangles vegetation category.

2. Basques Tropicales Aciculifolios (Perennifolios): Pinar — con Pimis caribaea. con
caribaeu \ P. tropicalis. con P. cubensis and con P. maesirensis were amalagamated and
are shown as pine forest.

Protected areas boundaries were derived from a printed map (nd. no title) at a scale of 1 : I mil-
lion, provided by Antonio Perera Puga (pers comm, 1991 ) of the Comision Rectora del Gran
Parque Nacional Sierra Maesira. Havana, Cuba with accompanying annotations for the
mapped conservation areas.

101

1 1 Hispaniola

DOMINIUN REPUBLIC

Country areo 49,730 sq, km

land areo 48,380 sq. km

Population (mid-1 994) 7 8 million

Population growth rote 2 2 per cent

Population projected to 2025 1 ] 4 million

Gross national product per capita (1992) US$1040

Forest cover for 1 990 (FAO, 1 993) 1 0,770 sq, km

Annual deforestation rate (1981-1990) 2 8 percent

Industrial roundwood production 6000 cu. m

Industrial roundwood exports —

Fuelwood and charcoal production 976,000 cu, m

Processed wood production —

Processed wood exports —

HAITI

Country area 27,750 sq. km

Land area 27,560 sq. km

Population (mid-1994) 7 million

Population growth rote 2 3 per cent

Population projected to 2025 131 million

Gross notional product per capita (1992) USS380

Forest cover for 1 990 (FAO, 1 993) 230 sq km

Annual deforestation rate (1981-1990) 4 8 per teni

Industrial roundwood production 239,000 cu m

Industrial roundwood exports —

Fuelwood and charcoal production 5,81 2,000 (u m

Processed wood production 14,000 cu. m

Processed wood exports —

The forested habitats of the Dominican RepubHc and Haiti, which comprise the island of Hispaniola. are undergoing
accelerating degradation. The prospects for conservation are particularly poor in Haiti, but even in the Dominican
Republic the forested lands face virtually unrestricted development for tourism and agriculture.

Introduction

The island of Hispaniola includes Haiti and the Dominican
Republic. The topography of the Dominican Republic is domi-
nated by four principal mountain I'anges which run northwest to
southeast and parallel to each other. The ncirthern most one is
the Cordillera Septentrional; the Cordillera Central extends into
Haiti and it is in this range that the highest point in the Antilles.
Pico Duarte at 3087 m, is found. The ranges in the southern part
of the country are the Sierra de Neiba and Sierra de Bahoruco,
both reaching more than 2000 m. There is also one minor range,
the Cordillera Oriental, in the northeast with an altitude of about
600 in. Much of the island is over 1000 m. The three valleys
between the principal ranges are major agricultural regions. A
low area. Llanura Costera. in the east of the country is also agri-
cultural land where rice and sugar cane are grown and cattle are
pastured.

The deep valley between the mountain ranges of Sierra de
Neiba and Sierra de Bahoruco was once a marine channel divid-
ing the area into a large northern and a small southern island. A
relic of this is left as Lago Enriquillo. a large saltwater lake 40 m
below sea level.

Haiti is also dominated by mountain chains. The Massif de la
Hotte in the southwest, the Massif de la Selle in the southeast
(this range continues eastwards as the Sierra de Bahoruco). the
Chaine des Matheux and Montagues du Trou-d"Eau in the cen-
tre, the Montagues Noires in the north-centre and the Massif du
Nord in the north. The highest point is Pic la Selle (2674 m) in
the Massif de Selle. The major valleys are in the northeast and
centre of the country. The northwestern peninsula. Presqu'ile du
Nord-Ouest. is a low ridge with arid areas associated with it
(Zanoni, 1989).

Hispaniola's climate is influenced mainly by humid northeast
trade winds and as a result, annual precipitation is very variable.
In the Dominican Republic, only 350 mm fall in the Neiba

Valley while 2750 mm fall at Laguna Limon. In Haiti, rainfall
\aries from less than 300 mm in the northwest to over 2800
mm. the greatest precipitation falls on the highest mountain
summits in the southwest (Ehrlich ct al.. 1985). There are two
rainy and two dry seasons. October and November are usually
the wettest months. January and February the driest. Mean
annual temperature is around 26°C. A major hurricane occurs
every ten to 20 years, causing tremendous damage both environ-
mentally and economically.

Columbus landed on Hispaniola in 1492 and was followed
by Spanish colonists who more or less wiped out the
Amerindian population (Cook and Borah. 1971; Deagan. 1985;
Keagan. 1992). In the late 17th century. French colonists began
to establish themselves in the western half of the island, then in
1 697. the Treaty of Ryswick divided the island between France
and Spain. Both countries became independent in the early 19th
century, though Haiti in particular has been plagued by upris-
ings and coups right up to the present.

Si.xty per cent of the Dominican Republic's population are
urban dwellers in comparison to 3 1 per cent in Haiti. The popu-
lation of the Dominican Republic is multiracial with 68 per cent
mulattos. 20 per cent Europeans, 1 1 per cent Afroamericans and
one per cent Asian (SEA/DVS. 1990). Overall population density
in the Dominican Republic is 161 people per sq. km; the coun-
try's most densely populated regions are the southern coast
around the capital city of Santo Domingo and the Cibao Valley
in the north. In Haiti, most of the population is of African ori-
gin. Overall density, at 254 inhabitants per sq. km. is higher
than in the Dominican Republic. Around half a million Haitians
are earning a meagre wage working in the Dominican Republic,
inainly in the agricultural sector.

The socioeconomic trends in the Dominican Republic have
been changing over the last twenty years. The society has

102

HiSPANIOLA

shifted from being rural and agriculture-dependent to become
urban and services orientated. Sugar was the backbone of the
economy and the main export in the 1970s, but with the drop in
demand many areas were converted to grow fruit and vegeta-
bles. The tourist industry is now an important source of income
for the country. In Haiti, the most important crop is coffee, fol-
lowed by sugar.

The Forests

The vegetation of Hispaniola is usually described in terms of
Holdridge's Life Zone System (Holdridge, 1947). Hartshorn er
ill. (1981) and Ehrlich et al. (1985) use this classification in
their descriptions of the forests of the Dominican Republic and
Haiti respectively. However, Hager and Zanoni (1993) have
recently published a description of the natural vegetation of the
Dominican Republic based on data from botanical field work.
They distinguish between dry, semi-deciduous, broadleaved
evergreen, pine, gallery and mangrove forests, as well as
describing several non-forest formations. Their forest descrip-
tions are used in this chapter.

The dry forests in the Dominican Republic are generally
found between elevations of 40 m and 500 m, in areas with rain-
fall of between 500 and 1000 mm. They are mostly very dis-
turbed. This forest type is now found in the country's south-
western lowlands around Azua, in the Neiba valley and on the
Barahona Peninsula and in the northwest in the Ciabo Valley
between Monte Cristi and Santiago. It is only on the Barahona
Peninsula that large areas of relatively undisturbed dry forest
remain.

The dry forests have a canopy at around 10 ni with little in
the way of a shrub or herb layer. Among the characteristic trees
and shrubs are Guaiacum sanctum. G. officinale, Phyllostylon
rhamnoides. Ziziphiis rignoni. Maytenus huxifotia. Capparis
spp. and Acacia skleroxyla. On very dry, rocky or sandy ground,
arborescent species of Cactaceae such as Opiintia /uonilifoniiis.
Lemaireocereus hystrix and Pilosocereiis polygouus are very
frequent. Cactus species are also common in disturbed dry
forests where the dominant tree species are the spiny Prosopis
juliflora and Acacia macracanlha.

The semi-deciduous forests are transitional between the dry
forests and the broadleaved evergreen forests. They are found
in the coastal plains and in mountainous regions at elevations
between 400 and 900 m. They occur in areas with a distinct
arid period and an annual precipitation of 1000 to 1800 mm. In
the coastal plains, two different formations can be distin-
guished — those on rocky ground and those in swampy areas.
The characteristic rocky ground formation can be found in Del
Este National Park and in the eastern coastal zone between
Macao and Cape San Rafael. This forest type has a canopy
only 3-10 m high and contains trees such as Kntgiodendron
ferreum, Coccoloha diversifolia. Biirsera simaruba,
Sideroxylon spp. and Ateramnus lucidus. The herb layer is
poorly developed and nearly always dominated by Zamia
pumila. The semi-deciduous forest on swampy ground is char-
acterised by two canopy layers. Generally the upper canopy
reaches 20 m and is dominated by Bitcida hiiceras. The lower
canopy is around 5 m in height and commonly contains
Annona glabra and Calopliylliim calaha. Representative forma-
tions of this forest are found near the southern part of Bavaro
Lagoon and by Hoyo Claro Lagoon. The mountainous semi-
deciduous forests are found on the southern slopes of the Sierra
de Neiba, the northern slopes of the Cordillera Central and in
large areas of the Sierra de Bahoruco. In the Sierra de Neiba.

these forests are dominated by Swielenia mahagoni and
Coccoloba diversifolia.

Two types of broadleaved evergreen forests are distinguished
in the Dominican Republic — the rain forests and the cloud
forests. The former are mostly found below 500 m; patches
occur between Puerto Plata and Miches on the slopes of the
Cordillera Septentrional and Cordillera Oriental, on Samana
Peninsula and in the basin of Ri'o Yuma. However, in the
Cordillera Central, they may be found as high as 1500 m.
Annual precipitation exceeds 2000 mm in the areas where rain
forests occur. The upper canopy of this forest type is usually
about 25 m high, but in those forests dominated by Sloanea ili-
cifolia (such as in Armando Bermudez National Park) it can
reach 40 m.

The evergreen rain forest formations are quite variable. For
instance, in Los Haitises National Park the rain forest occurs on
a limestone karst and two associations occur: the inogole associ-
ation of Coccothrinax spp., Leptogonum molle and Sapiiim
daphnoides amongst others; and the valley association including
O.xandra laiirifolia. Tetragastris balsamifera and Dendropanax
arboreus. In other areas, the rain forests are dominated by Mora
abboltii. This species occurs on the northeastern slopes of the
Cordillera Septentrional between Moca and Nagua, in places on
the eastern Cordillera Central and particularly in the forests of
Loma Quita Espuela and Loma Guaconejo. In Loma La
Herradura in the Cordillera Oriental another formation is found:
it includes Buchenavia spp.. Didymopanax morntotoni and
Oinosia krngii.

Cloud forests are found in the high mountains, between
600 m and 2300 m. They are characterised by an abundance
of epiphytes. In areas between 600 and 1250 m in elevation,
on steep northern slopes and in mountain valleys, the palm
cloud forest, or manaclar. is common. This forest type is
dominated by Prestoea montana and tree ferns Cyathea spp.
In areas of the eastern Sierra Bahoruco and in parts of the
Cordillera Central above 1200 m the cloud forests are domi-
nated by Didxinopanax Irenuiliis. often in association with
species of Magnolia. In the western part of the Sierra de
Neiba and in the Valle Nuevo Scientific Reserve at altitudes
between 1800 and 2200 m the cloud forest is dominated by
Podocarpus aristulalits.

Elfin woodlands are known only from the top of Loma Nalga
de Maco between 1800 and 1900 m. They have a canopy at only
5 m and are characterised by an association of Coccoloba panel-
flora and Podocarpus hlspcmiolensis.

Pine forests of the native Pinus occidentalis are the natural
vegetation in high altitude zones of the Cordillera Central, Sierra
de Bahoruco and, to a lesser degree, in the Sierra de Neiba.

In Haiti, the subtropical moist forest life zone is the most
extensive zone. The natural vegetation of this zone is a well
developed heterogenous forest of broadleaved trees, but clearing
for agriculture has reduced the forest to mere remnants. Catalpa
longisiliqua and mahogany Swietenia sp. are characteristic tree
species, while the royal palm Roystonea regia is very common
on limestone soils (Ehrlich et al.. 1985).

In Haiti, the dry forest zone is the second largest life zone. It
is characterised by Phyllostylon brasiliense. Prosopis juliflora
and Guaiacum officinalis (Ehrlich et al.. 1985).

The subtropical lower montane rain forest includes most of
the remaining pine (Piinis occidentalis) forest in Haiti.

The natural vegetation of the other zones has not been
described by Erhlich et al. (1985). little if any of the forest
remains.

103

HiSPANIOLA

20 40 60 so lOOkra

Mercalor Projection

Figure 11.1 The forest ecosystems in the Dominican Republic, based on 1984 aerial photographs.

SoiiiLf: afler Schubert 1 1993)

Mangroves

The largest areas of mangrove are found in the northeast of
the Dominican Republic at Manzanillo, Montecristi and
Samana Bay. Analysis of aerial photographs taken between
1983 and 1984 indicated that approximately 325 sq. km of
mangroves remained in the Dominican Republic (SEA/DVS.
1990). Common species include Conocarpus erectus,
Rhizophora mangle, Laguncularia racemosa and Avicennia
germinans.

Mangrove forests in the Dominican Republic are particu-
larly threatened by development for the tourist trade.
Extensive areas are being devastated in Punta Cana, one of
the largest resorts in the eastern portion of the country,
between Puerto Plata and Samana in the north and northeast
and between La Romana and Boca de Yuma in the southeast.
The development of Montecristi and the Barahona Peninsula
is expected to cause further devastation on the northwest and
southwest coasts.

Ehrlich et al. (1985) reported that there were a total of 224
sq. km of mangrove in Haiti, with major areas in the Bay of
Caracol and L'Estere. In later papers (Thorbjarnarson, 1988;
Paryski et al.; 1989), it was estimated that there were about 180
sq. km of mangroves. Mangroves are used for charcoal and

polewood, but this does not yet have a significant impact. It is
forbidden by law to cut these forests, but this is not enforced.
Nevertheless, the mangrove forests are one of the least threat-
ened ecosystems in Haiti (Paryski et al.. 1989).

Forest Resources and Management

When Columbus arrived in Hispaniola, the island was almost
entirely forested. Today, about 90 per cent of the forests in the
Dominican Republic have vanished due to human activities
(SEA/DVS, 1990). At the beginning of this century, 40,000 sq.
km or 85 per cent of the country was forested, this was reduced
to 34,000 ,sq km by 1940, to 1 1,000 sq. km in 1973 and to only
5000 sq. km or 10 per cent of the Dominican Republic by 1986
(SEA/DVS, 1990). FAO (1993) gives the considerably higher
estimate of 10,770 sq. km remaining in 1990. of which 8540 sq.
km was closed broadleaved forest.

DIRENA, using aerial photographs from 1983-84, detailed
the land use in the Dominican Republic as shown in Table
11.1 (Republica Dominica, 1992). According to this report,
there were approximately 3000 sq. km each of both pine and
broadleaved forests remaining in the country at that time. No
recent, accurate map of the forests in the country has been
found for this Atlas, therefore a sketch map based on 1984 aer-

104

HiSPANIOLA

iai photographs (Schubert. 1993) has been reproduced here as
Figure 1 1 .1 .

The first documented attempt to regulate clearing of forests
in the Dominican Republic was in 1884. when all clearing near
river beds and springs was banned and farmers were ordered to
keep five per cent of their property in forest (Reynoso et ai.
1988). Since then, a total of 63 laws, two executive orders, three
resolutions and several decrees have been legislated for the pro-
tection of forests (J. Ottenwalder, in litt. 1993).

While about 26 government agencies are involved in the
management of natural resources in the Dominican Republic, in
an administrative und/or advisory capacity, two institutions —
the General Directorate of Forests (DGF) and the National
Forestry Technical Commission (CONATEF) — are directly
invested with management authority for the administration and
management of the forests. A third institution, the Directorate of
National Parks (DPN), is involved when the forests occur in
conservation areas.

DGF was created in 1962 both to enforce legislation pro-
hibiting tree cutting and to preserve national security in forest

areas. The DGF is also responsible for Government reafforesta-
tion projects and controls the production and distribution of
charcoal. It, however, lacks an adequate budget and trained
personnel.

The National Technical Forestry Commission (CONATEF)
was established in 1982 to develop a national plan for the
organisation of the forestry sector. In 1985. the role of
CONATEF was expanded to include forest preservation, devel-
opment and policy and it thereby became the primary institution
for the administration of forest resources, while DGF became
the agency for implementing forest policy.

In 1967. in an attempt to enforce forestry regulations, all
sawmills were closed and the cutting of trees was declared ille-
gal throughout the country. In 1986, Operacion Selva Negra
was launched by the government of the Dominican Republic to
enforce these regulations (Ottenwalder, 1989). It was intended
to stop illegal, indiscriminate deforestation and to give
CONATEF time to develop a programme for the sustainable
utilisation of dry forests. It lasted for several months and.
although cosmetic in nature and achievements, it was highly

Figure 11.2 Land in Haiti covered with forest having at least 60% tree coverage.

Sra/rif.-Ehrlich«u/ (WS.S)

Nfcrcalor Projection

Land with 60% tree cover
Water bodies

- 18

105

HiSPANIOLA

Table 11.1 Land use in the Dominican Republic

Land Use

Area Isij. km)

9c of land

Urban zone

361

0.8

Sugar cane

4.074

8.4

Other agriculture

12.883

26.6

Pastures

13.736

28.4

Pine forests

2.950

6.1

Broadleaved forests

2.893

6.0

Dry forests

8.055

16.7

Matorral/Brushland

2.094

4.3

Wetlands

210

0.4

Others

1,124

2.3

Total

48.380

100

Source: Republica Dominica ( 1992}

1985). The single largest stretch of forest remaining in the iiiid-
1980s was the 264 sq. km stand of pine forest in the southeast of
the country. Paryski cl al.. ( 1989) reported that forest cover in
the country was less than 1.5 per cent, while FAO (1993) esti-
mates that only 230 sq. km of forest (0.8 per cent of the coun-
try's land area) remained in 1990.

In Haiti it is the Division of Natural Resources (DNR) within
the Ministry of Agriculture (MARNDR — Minislere de
L' Agriculture, des Ressources Naturelles et du Developpement
Rural) which is responsible for the protection of forests, water-
sheds, coastal resources and other natural resources. Most of its
efforts so far have been restricted to regulating hunting and fish-
ing and to very limited reforestation projects (Paryski et al..
1989). Low budgets, a lack of trained personnel, no clear poli-
cies and changing government priorities have prevented any
serious conservation efforts.

successful as an extension and public relations exercise (J.
Ottenwalder. in litt. 1993).

Interest and efforts to develop a national programme for for-
est management rose during the late 1960s. Inventories of forest
resources were conducted between 1967 and 1974 by OEA and
FAO. while integrated conservation-development projects, tar-
geting important watersheds and rural areas and often including
reafforestation plans, began in 1970.

From its inception to 1985. DGF has reforested about 79 sq.
km. mostly with the exotic Piniis caribea rather than the
indigenous P. occidenlcdis. Few follow-up evaluations of the
plantations occur, but it is estimated that about 65 per cent of
them sur\ive (Pefia. 1988). The reafforestation programme has
been hampered by a scarcity of trained professionals, a lack of
financial and technical support and inadequate institutional
support.

FAO ( 1994) reported that production of fuelv\ood and char-
coal in the Dominican Republic was less than one million cubic
metres in 1992. However, the government (Republica
Dominica. 1992) has calculated that yearly consumption is 3.9
million cu. m and that it will increase at an annual rale of 1.4
per cent. Forests with a potential for fuelwood production are
estimated to cover between 2000 and 3000 sq. km, but average
yields are so low (about 2 cu. m/ha/year) that, even if the
forests were managed, they could not satisfy the projected
demand. In the year 2000. the annual demand for firewood is
expected to be 4.760.000 cu. m (Republica Dominica. 1992).
Around 75 per cent of the energy for domestic use comes from
the forests: they supply, overall, about 29 per cent of the coun-
try's total energy demands.

As from January 1987, a five year ban was passed on the
capture, killing or exploitation of all native wild vertebrates in
the Dominican Republic (Ottenwalder. 1989). This was ex-
tended in February 1992 for another ten years. Excluded from
the decree are species considered to be agriculture pests and
exotic predators. Enforcement of these regulations is poor.

In Haiti, Holdridge (1947) calculated that forests, in the
absence of humans, could potentially occupy 55 per cent of the
land area. However, very little of this remains. Even as early as
1954, it was reported that only eight or nine per cent of the land
surface was forested (Burns. 1954). In 1978. it was estimated
that 6.7 per cent of the land was covered with forest having al
least 60 per cent tree coverage (Figure 1 1.2); 659 .sq. km (36 per
cent) had a canopy cover of 80-100 per cent: while I 1 88 sq. km
had a canopy cover between 60 and 80 per cent (Ehrlich et al..

Deforestation

The earliest Ainerindian settlers on Hispaniola were primarily
hunter gatherers who had little impact on the forest. Even though
the Tainos. who arrived later, were practising intensive agricul-
ture by the time they were discovered, they were concentrated
along the coast and their population density was low so that they
too had a minimal effect on the forests (Lugo et al.. 1981 ).

The forests have diminished only since European colonisa-
tion. Between 1630 and 1880s, as in many of the Caribbean
islands, the lowland forests were gradually converted to planta-
tions of sugar cane and African slaves were brought in to work
on the land. After this period, following the abolition of slavery
and the economic collapse of monocultures, some destruction of
montane forests took place as many of the freed slaves moved
to the mountains (Lugo e! al.. 1981). The scarcity of lowlands
and valleys in Haiti meant that the upland forests there were
exploited early on. In both countries, the temporary rise in the
price of sugar cane at the end of the First World War meant that
some plantations were extended considerably (J. Ottenwalder.
in litt. 1993).

In the Dominican Republic. de\astation of pine and
broadleaved forests is mostly caused by clearing for agriculture
and pasture and by the demand for forest products.
Deterioration of the dry forests is due mainly to collecting of
wood for charcoal and fuel, for both domestic and industrial
purposes (Ottenwalder, 1989). If the government's estimates
(Republica Dominica. 1992) of annual consumption of firewood
are correct, the outlook for the dry forests in particular is
extremely bleak. FAO (1993) estimates deforestation in the
Dominican Republic to be 351 sq. km each year, an annual rate
of 2.8 per cent.

Table 11.2 Status of locally threatened species within the
Dominican Republic

Endangert'd Vulnerable Rare Unknown

Fish

Amphibians

Reptiles

Birds

Mammals

Total

X«H;Tf. SEA/DVS. 1991)

106

HiSPANIOLA

Jaragua NP

-10 60

Msrcalor Projecticxi

Figure 11.3 Protected areas in the Doininiean Republic in lUCN's categories I-IV

Russell (1988) attempted to measure the rate of deforestation
in the western half of the Dominican Republic by comparing
satellite photographs taken in 1972. 1979 and 1986. He calcu-
lated that 2115 sq. km of hardwood and pine forests disappeared
between 1972 and 1986, giving an annual deforestation of 141 sq.
km per year. During the same period, annual deforestation of the
subtropical dry and thorn forests was calculated to be 106 sq. km.
Most of the forested land was cleared for agriculture and pasture.

The same problems occur in Haiti where, after inany genera-
tions of land abuse, there is now a tradition of land stewardship
in the country by which most peasants expect to exploit the
land. Indeed, peasant life is almost totally dependent on cutting
trees for construction, fuelwood and charcoal and for clearing
new agricultural land to replace that rendered unproductive by
overuse and erosion (Paryski et at.. 1989).

In addition, large quantities of timber were cut and exported
from Haiti as early as the 19th century, for instance in 1845,
18,600 cu. m of mahogany alone were exported (Paryski et al..
1989). It is estimated that by 2008 only one of Haiti's river
basins will have any forest cover remaining. Paul Paryski (in
litt,, 1993) working for UNDP in Haiti, estimates annual defor-
estation rate in the country to be 3.8 per cent. However FAO
(1993) give ihe higher figure of 4.8 per cent; this, though, is
onl\ 15 sq. km each year.

Biodiversity

The flora of the island of Hispaniola is the second most diverse
for the Caribbean islands. Of the estimated 5000 flowering
plants and conifers, 30-33 per cent are considered endemic
(Zanoni, 1989). The areas with highest rainfall are the most
diverse with the highest number of endemics.

There is little monitoring of the status of the plants on
Hispaniola, but a considerable number are threatened. For
instance, on the Dominican Republic the endemic Cnprorhiza
liaitiensis and the palm cacheo Pseudophoeni.x ekmanii are
being eliminated by commercial use.

Hispaniola has the highest faunal diversity and levels of
endemism of the West Indies, with the Dominican Republic
having the highest diversity and endemism in vertebrate
groups of all the Caribbean islands. As on the other islands,
most (18 of 20) of the native mammals remaining on
Hispaniola are bats. Haiti used to have at least 28 species of
native terrestrial mammals, but now only two survive
(Woods, 1983; Paryski et a/.. 1989). These are the endan-
gered Haitian solenodon Solenodon paradoxus and the rare
Hispaniolan huita Plagiodontia aedium. A species recovery
plan has been completed for S. paradoxus and a major reserve
on the north side of Pic Macaya has been proposed to protect
it; this species is considered to be the highest priority for con-

107

HlSPANIOLA

Maiiuiiu I Liiii jitic.sts in the L
Dominican Republic.

\ L-rde Area. Ceninil
(WWF/Mauri Raulkaii)

servation in Haili (Otlenwalder. 1992a; Woods et al.. 1992;
Woods and Otlenwalder. 1992). The other species on the
island listed as threatened by lUCN (Groonibridge. 198.^) is
the Cuban tlower bat Pliyllonycteris poeyi. There are 12 intro-
duced species of mammal (Woods and Ottenwalder. 1992) of
which the mongoose Herpestes auropunctatiis and rat Rtilliis
norvefiicii.s have a considerable adverse impact on the native
fauna.

A total of 136 resident and I 18 migratory birds have been
recorded in the Dominican Republic. 22 of these are endemic
to the island (SEA/DVS. 1990). The same eight bird species
(five endemics) are listed as threatened in Haiti as in the
Dominican Republic: four are at risk mainly as a result of
deforestation. (Collar el al.. 1992). The Hispaniolan hawk
Biiteo riclgwayi and white-winged warbler Xenoligea montana
have all but vanished from Haiti as most of their forest habitat
has been cut down; the latter is. however, found in some pro-
tected areas. La Selle thrush Timiiis swalesi and the chat tanag-
er Calyptopliiliiifnigivuriis are in protected areas in both coun-
tries, but neither species is considered safe (Woods and
Ottenwalder, 1992). The fifth endemic species, the rufous-
breasted cuckoo Hyelornis ritfigiilaris is found in many habitat
types and over a wide range of altitudes. It is hunted, as medic-
inal food, and its scarcity may be due to the impact of pesti-
cides and fertilizers as well as to the general degradation of the
island's natural vegetation (Collar er al.. 1992). The ground
warbler Microligea montana and the Hispaniolan parrot
Amazona ventralis are also considered to be threatened in Haiti
(P. Paryski, in litt.). although they are not listed by Collar el al.
(1992) as globally threatened. Species recovery plans have
been completed for the black-capped petrel Pleirulronia luisiui-
la. the white-winged warbler and the Hispaniolan ciossbill
Lo.xia megaplaga (Ottenwalder. 1992b. 1992c. 1992d: Woods
etal.. 1992; Woods and Ottenwalder. 1992).

Sixty species of amphibian have been recorded on the island,
all belong to the order Anura, while 43 belong to the genus
Eleulherodaelyhis (Schubert. 1993). Hyla vasia is threatened in
both countries, while E. semipalmaliis is threatened in Haiti
(Groombridge. 1993). The cane toad Biijo inaiiinis and the frog
Rana catesheiana have been introduced.

There are 141 reptiles on the island. 117 of which are
endemic and two lizards are introduced (Schubert. 1993).
There is still a significant number of the threatened American
crocodile Crocodylus aciitus on the island. However, numbers
in Lake Enriquillo. which was considered to be one of the
largest concentrations of the species, have declined from an
estimated 500 in 1980 to only 100 in 1992 (J. Ottenwalder, in

litt. 1993). A recovery plan is being implemented by a con-
sortium of government institutions and NGOs. Six other rep-
tiles (excluding the marine turtles) are threatened in the
Dominican Republic, three of these are also listed for Haiti
(Groombridge. 1993).

There are 70 species of fresh or brackish water fish recorded
on the island of which 22 are endemic. Numbers of inverte-
brates are not known. Eight species are listed as threatened in
the Dominican Republic, with six of these given for Haiti also
(Groombridge, 1993). The two listed as vulnerable are
Fhylolestes elhelae and liiillus zelides. the latter is in both
countries.

There are 89 species or subspecies of vertebrates in the
Dominican Republic that are considered to be locally threat-
ened, their .status is shown in Table I 1.2 (SEA/DVS. 1990). Of
these. 13 reptiles and one bird, the spotted rail Pardinilliis niac-
iilatiis. are not found in a protected area.

Conservation Areas

The first of the Dominican Republic's conservation areas were
set up in the 1950s when two stretches of montane forest in the
Cordillera Central were gazetted as national parks. There is
now a network of 24 conservation areas, although not all of
these are in lUCN's categories I-IV (Table 1 1.3. Figure 1 1.3).
and they protect representative areas of the country's ecosys-
tems. Nevertheless, these protected areas do not exist as a
structured national system at present. A systematic, compre-
hensive evaluation of them and their legislation is required to
achieve national conservation objectives. The government has
failed to allocate the financial and administrative resources
necessary to implement the laws adequately and truly protect
the conservation areas (Reynoso el al.. 1988). Park guards are
generally underpaid and inadequately trained. Monte Cristi
National Park is considered to be the most threatened of the
conservation areas.

Fifteen new conservation areas have been proposed
(SEA/DVS, 1990). These areas were selected for their poten-
tial contribution to national biodiversity conservation and
include habitat types that are not under protection in the exist-
ing network. There are also proposals to expand some of the
present protected areas, and to manage others as Biosphere
Reserves.

The National Park Directorate (DNP) in the Dominican
Republic was created in 1974. It is responsible for developing,
managing, regulating and protecting the country's conservation
areas. The institution has been affected by budget limitations,
political influences and its role overlapping with that of DGF.

In various protected areas, a co-management strategy has
been developed with local or national NGOs cooperating with
DNP to protect natural resources, develop and implement
management plans for the conservation areas or work in sur-
rounding buffer zones. For instance, Fundacion Quito Espuela
works in Loma Quita Espuela Scientific Reserve, Progressio in
Ebano Verde Scientific Reserve and Grupo Jaragua in Jaragua
National Park.

Management plans have been written for three of the national
parks (Jaragua, Los Haitises and Del Este) and there are draft
plans for two others: Jose del Carmen Ramfrez and Armando
Bermudez. The management plan for Jaragua has. since 1991,
been successfully implemented: the plan for Del Este was
scheduled for implementatit)n beginning in 1993/1994. All the
conservation areas have suffered some form of exploitation
(Reynoso el al., 1988) and, in addition, government agencies

108

HiSPANIOLA

Table 1 1.3 Conservation areas of the Dominican Republic

Existing conservation areas in lUCN's categories 1-IV are listed. The
large wildlife sanctuary (for whales) is not listed.

NaUiiiuil Parks

Area (sc/. km)

Del Este

420

Isla Cabritos

Jaragua

1,374

Jo.se Armando Bermiidez

766

Jose del Carmen Rami'rez

738

Los Haitises

1.600

Monle Crisli+

1.310

Sierra de Bahoruco

800

Scientific Re.senes

Ebano Verde

Laguna del Rincon

Lagunas Redonda y Limon

101

Loma Quita Espuela

Valle Nuevo

409

Villa Elisa/Dr Orlando Franco

0.2

Historic National Parks

La Isabela'

0.3

La Vega Vieia"

Total 1 1 .435

+ includes Cayos Siete Hermanos Bird Sancluar>

not shown on Figure I 1 .3
Source: WCMC (unpublished data)

Other than DNP often carry out programmes which foster the
invasion of parks and reserves.

As well as the areas controlled by DNP, there are three Zo/uis
Vedadas, two managed by the General Directorate of Forests
and the third, the Rio Nizao watershed, managed jointly by
DNP and DGF. The sizes and lUCN category of these are
unknown.

In Haiti, a decree of 1968 declared eight sites as national
parks or nature sites (lUCN, 1992), but these were mostly
small areas of historic interest. They were all less than 50
hectares except for the 22 sq. km La Citadelle. In 1979, the
Institut de Sauvegarde du Patrimoine National (ISPAN) was
created to protect and conserve Haiti's natural and cultural
heritage and in 1983 two new parks (La Viste and Pic
Macaya) were gazetted by presidential decree, with financial
help from USAID. However, the decree creating the new
parks failed to assign final responsibility for them to a single
government agency and there has been some conflict between
ISPAN and MARNDR as a result. Neither organisation have
the staff or budget to adequately protect the parks. Both areas
suffer from invasion by peasants, who clear the forests to
plant crops. The eight areas designated earlier are still pro-
tected, but they are not listed in Table I 1 .4 as they are not in
lUCN's categories I-IV.

Management plans have been written for Haiti's three largest
protected areas — La Citadelle (22 sq. km, category V), La
Visite and Pic Macaya (Woods et al.. 1992 — shown on Figure
11.2). The World Bank's Forestry and Environmental project
proposes to consolidate the management of all the parks in Haiti
under the administrative control of the Service for the
Protection of the Environment (SPE) of MARNDR.

A national marine park at Les Arcadins, about 30 km from
Port-au-Prince, has been proposed as a conservation and eco-
tourism site by WWF.

Conservation Initiatives

In 1991. a Forestry Code for the management and administra-
tion of the Dominican Republic's forest resources and a
Strategy for the Conservation of Biological Diversity in the
Dominican Republic were prepared; the former by
CONATEF/SURENA and the latter by the NGO Grupo
Jaragua. A Forestry Action Plan is currently under review. In
addition, a Coastal Zone Management Plan for the entire coast
of the country was prepared and released by the Oficina
Nacional de Planificacion (ONAPLAN) in 1993.

Participation of Dominican NGOs in environmental is.sues
has increased considerably, particularly since the mid-1980s.
Today about 50 of these organisations are directly or indirectly
involved in the sector. About 20 are committed to the protec-
tion, conservation and promotion of natural resources and bio-
logical diversity, with programmes involving protected areas,
endangered species, environmental education, community
development, sustainable development and control of pollutants
amongst other things.

Over the past 25 years there has been aid to the forestry sec-
tor from a variety of international organisations. This includes
assistance with resource assessment, forest management, educa-
tion, technical training, watershed management and institutional
strengthening from organisations such as OAS. FAO. UNDP
and IICA.

There are also other international governmental and non-gov-
ernmental organisations involved in the promotion and support
of biodiversity conservation and sustainable development in the
Dominican Republic. The groups involved at present include
USAID. TNC. WWF. World Bank. lUCN. OEA. the Center for
Marine Conservation. GTZ and the Spanish Cooperation
Agency.

USAID has financed a massive reafforestation and agro-
forestry project in Haiti through the Pan American
Development Foundation. A number of private environmental
lobby groups have been established in the last few years and
they have helped the public become aware of Haiti's enormous
environmental problems. The Haitian government also pre-
pared an environmental plan which was presented to UNCED
in 1992.

An environmental unit has been established recently by
UNDP in Haiti. Its activities include: facilitating and coordinat-
ing the programmes, strategies and projects of the donor com-
munity, the NGOs and the private sector in Haiti, mainly
through an inter-agency committee; monitoring and document-
ing the status of the environment in Haiti using databases, a
GIS, satellite imagery and useful environmental indicators; ful-
filling UNDP directives concerning the environment, especially
those resulting from UNCED and Agenda 21: and facilitating
the preparation and execution of environmental projects.

Table 1 1.4 Conservation areas of Haiti

Existing conser\ation areas in lUCN's categories I-IV are listed.

Natural National Parks
La Visite
Pic Macaya

Total

Source: WCMC (unpublished data)

20
55

109

HiSPANIOLA

Unfortunately the September 1991 coup d'e[;U and the conse-
quent political crisis have resulted in the suspension of most of
the local government and internationally funded programmes that
were established to address conservation and environmental prob-
lems. For instance, in 1992. US AID terminated funding to the
University of Florida Biosphere Reserve Project, which was set
up to establish a functional biosphere reserve around Pic Macaya
(2347 m) to protect its exceptional biodiversity, its last relictual
cloud forests and the watercatchment zone for Haiti's southern

peninsula. However, after a major lobbying effort. U.SAID agreed
to continue conservation acti\ ities in the Pic Macaya area by
funding a local NGO. and the Haitian go\ernmenl has assigned
soldiers to protect the reserve, a measure which has halted much
of the destruction of the remaining forests there.

The situation in Haiti remains very difficult due to the continu-
ing and unresolved political crisis and an OAS trade embargo
which has further impoverished the peasant farmers, forcing them
to destroy their environment and Haiti's forests merely to survive.

References

Burns (1954). Report lo the Government of Hiiiti on Forest
Policy and its Implementation. Report 346. United Nations.
Fao. Rome.

Collar. N.J.. Gon/aga. L.P.. Krabbe, N., Madrofio Nieto. A..
Naranjo. L.G.. Parker III. T.A. and Wege. D.C. (1992).
Threatened Birds of the Americas. The ICBP/IUCN Red Data
Book. ICBP. Cambridge. U.K.

Cook, S.F. and Borah. W. ( 1971 ). The aboriginal population of
Hispaniola. In: Essays in Population History. Volume I:
Mexico and the Caribbean. Cook. S.F. and Borah. W. (eds).
University of California Press, Berkeley. Pp. 376-410.

Deagan, K. (1985). .Spanish-Indian interactions in sixteenth cen-
tury Florida and the Caribbean. In: Cultures in Contact.
Fitzhugh. W. (ed.). Smithsonian Institute Press. Washington.
D.C. Pp. 281-318.

Ehrlich, M., Conway. F., Adrien, N.. Le Beau, F.. Lewis, L.
Lauwerysen, H., Lowenthal, I., Mayda, Y.. Paryski, P..
Smucker. G.. Talbot. J. and Wilcox. E. (1985). Haiti:
Countiy Environmental Profile, a field study. USAID.

FAO (1993) Forest resources assessment 1990: Tropical coun-
tries. FAO Forestry Paper I 12. FAO. Rome, Italy.

FAO (1994). FAO Yearbook: Forest Products 1981-1992. FAO
Forestry series No. 27, FAO Statistics Series No. 1 16. FAO,
Rome. Italy.

Groombridge, B. (Ed). (1993). 1994 lUCN Red List of
Threatened Animals. lUCN, Gland. Switzerland and
Cambridge, U.K.

Hartshorn. G.. Antonini. G.. DuBois. R.. Harcharik. D..
Heckadon, S.. Newton. H.. Quesada. C Shores. J. and
Staples. G. (1981). The Dominican Republic: Country
Environmental Profile, a field study. USAID

Hager, J. and Zanoni. Th.A. (1993). La vegetacion natural de la
Republica Dominica: Una nueva clasificacion. Moscosoa 7:
39-81.

Holdridge. L.R. ( 1947). The Pine Forest and Adjacent
Mountain Vegetation of Haiti Considered from the
Standpoint of a New Climatic Classification of Plant
Formations. Unpublished PhD dissertation. University of
Michigan. Anne Arbor. Michigan.

lUCN (1992). Protected Areas of the World: A review of
national systems. Volume 4: Nearctic and Neotropical.
lUCN. Gland. Switzerland and Cambridge. U.K.

Keagan, W.F. (1992). The People Who Discovered Columbus:
The Prehistory of the Bahamas. University Press of Florida.
Gainseville. Florida.

Lugo. A.E., Schmidt. R. and Brown, S. (1981). Tropical forests
in the Caribbean. Ainbio 10(6): 318-324.

Ottenwalder. J. A. (1989). A summary of con.servation trends in
the Dominican Republic. In: Biogeography of the West
Indies: past present and future. Woods, C.A. (ed.). Sandhill
Crane Press, Inc., Gainseville, Florida, U.S.A. Pp. 845-850.

Ottenwalder, J. A. (1992a). Recovery Plan for the Hispaniola
Solenodon in the Massif de la Hotte, Haiti. Unpublished
technical report prepared for the Macaya National Park
Project/University of Florida and MacArthur Foundation.
37pp.

Ottenwalder, J. A. ( 1992b). Recoveiy Plcm for the Black-capped
petrel (Pterodroma hasitata) in Southern Haiti. Unpublished
technical report prepared for the Macaya National Park
Proiect/University of Florida and MacArthur Foundation.
18pp.

Ottenwalder. J. A. (1992c). Recovery Plan for the White-winged
u«/'/7/<'/' (Xenoligea montana) //( Southern Haiti. Unpublished
technical report prepared for the Macaya National Park
Project/University of Florida and MacArthur Foundation.
13pp.

Ottenwalder, J. A. (I992d). Recovery Plan for the Hispaniolan
crossbill (Loxia megaplaga) in Southern Haiti. Unpublished
technical report prepared for the Macaya National Park
Project/University of Florida and MacArthur Foundation.
13pp.

Paryski, P., Woods, C.A. and Sergile. F. (1989). Con.servation
strategies and the preservation of biological diversity in
Haiti. In: Biogeography of the West Indies: past present and
future. Woods. C.A. (ed.). Sandhill Crane Press. Inc..
Gainseville. Florida. U.S.A. Pp. 855-878.

Pena, J.M. ( 1988). Informe Tecnico del Di'a de Campo Forestal.
December 11, 198H. Fundacion Miguel L. de Peiia Garcia
Inc. Santo Domingo.

Republica Dominica (1992). Republica Dominica: liforme
Nacional 1991. Conferencia Mundial de las Naciones Unidas
sobre medio ambiente y desarrollo, Brasil. Santo Domingo.
Editora Taller.

Reynoso, F.A., Dotzauer, H., Herrera. H.C., Garcia, J.R.,
Rodriguez, A. A., Geraldes, F.X. and McCluskey. D. (1988).
The Dominican Republic: Biological Diversity Assessment.
USAID.

Russell, A.F. (1988). Uso del Suelo y Degradacidn Ainbiental
en la Zona Occidental de la Republica Doininicana Durante
el Periodo 1972-1986: Una Evaluacion Cuantitativa de las
Variaciones de la Cobertura Vegetal con la Aytida de
Imdgenes de Saelites Landsat. Unpublished thesis.
Universidad Calolica Madre y Maestra. Santiago. Dominican
Republic.

Schubert, A. (1993). Conser\ation of biological diversity in the
Dominican Republic. 0/^v27(2): 1 15-121.

SEA/DVS (1990). La Diversidad Biologica en la Republica
Dominicana. Reporte preparado por el Departamento de
Vida Silvestre para el Servicio Aleman de Cooperacion
Social-Tecnica y WWF-LIS. Secretari'a de Estado de
Agricultura. SURENA/DVS. Santo Domingo. 266 pp.

Thorbjarnarson. J.B. (1988). The status and ecology of the

HiSPANIOLA

American crocodile in Haiti. Biillcliii Florida State Mtiseiini

Biological Science 33( I ): 1-86.
Woods, C.A. (1983). Biological .survey ol' Haiti: .status of the

endangered birds and iriainmals. Natiinial Geoiiraphic

Society Research Reports 15: 759-768.
Woods. C.A. and Ottenwalder, J. A. (1992). The Natural History

of Southern Haiti. Special Publication, Florida Museiun of

Natural History. Pp. 21 1.
Woods, C.A., Sergile, F.E. and Ottenwalder, J. A. (1992).

Stewardship Plan for the National Parks and Naliiral Areas

of Haiti. Special Publication. Florida Museum of Natural

History. Pp. 334.
Zanoni. T. (1989). Hispaniola. In: Floristic Inventory of

Tropical Forests: the Status of Plant Systematics.
Collections, and Vegetation, plus Recommendations for the
Future. Campbell, D.G. and Hammond, H.D. (eds). The
New York Botanical Garden, New York, U.S.A. Pp.
336-340.

Authors; Caroline Harcourt and Jose Ottenwalder. of Florida
Museum of Natural History; with The Forest section and other
information contributed by Andreas Schubert and Dieter
Hoener of Servicio Aleman, further contributions from Paul
Paryski, UNDP, Haiti and Charles Woods. Florida Museum of
Natural History.

ill

12 Jamaica

Country orea 10,990 sq km

Land area 10,830 sq. km

' N_

Populatian (mid- 1994) 2 5 million

.'■ s

Population growth rate 1 8 per cent

Population projected to 2025 3 5 million

Gross national product per capita (1992) USS1340

Forest cover lor 1989 (see Map) 3181 sq km

Forest cover lor 1 990 (FAO, 1 993) 2390 sq km
Annual delorestotion rate (1981-1990) 7 2 per cent
Industrial roundvKood production 1 56,000 cu m

Industrial roundwood exports —

Fuelwood and charcoal production 1 3,000 cu. m

"**>

Processed wood production 28,000 cu. m

■'"~ • /

Processed wood exports —

' ^.,

Centuries of det'oicstation caused by clearing land for farming and settlement has reduced the area of natural, undis

turbed forest on Jamaica to a tiny proportion of the original. It is only the forest in the most remote, int
1 that has survived undisturbed.
In spite of concern about Jamaica's forests being fust expressed over

naccessible and

steepest part of the island that has survived undisturbed.

ite of concern about Jamaica's forests being fust expressed over a century ago. lack of funds has meant that little
has ever been done to preserve them. The major destructive element has been widespread agriculture mismanagement.

Introduction

Jamaica is the third largest island in the Caribbean, it is 236 km
long and between 35 and 82 km wide. The island has a central
backbone of peaks and plateaux running the length of the island,
which reaches 22.'i6 m at Blue Mountain Peak in the east. The
high mountains are flanked by limestone plateaux and hills,
occupying the central and western two thirds of the island. This
highland interior is surrounded by a flatter coastal strip that is
narrow in the north, while the southern coastal plains are broad
and include flat alluvial areas, swamps and dry hills.

Over half the island is above 300 m. approximately 80 per
cent is hilly or mountainous and more than 50 per cent has
slopes exceeding 20 degrees. The impact of years of shifting
agriculture and removal of forest cover on steep slopes with
high rainfall and erodible soils has created a situation of severe
environmental degradation in many watersheds. Most of the
rivers in the country are short and fast flowing.

Temperatures in the coastal lowlands are fairly uniform with
an average of 27°C. ranging from 23°C in the coldest months of
January and February to 28'C in July and August, the warmest
months. On Blue Mountain Peak, the mean annual average tem-
perature is only 13°C. Precipitation is very varied both within
and between years and on the different parts of the island. Mean
annual rainfall over the whole island is about 1960 mm. with the
capital city of Kingston receiving less than 1300 mm and the
Blue Mountains and north-east coast having over 3300 mm
(CEP. 1987). May and October are the wettest months. March
and June the driest. Hurricanes ciccur fairly frequently and can
cause considerable damage.

Jamaica's population is 48 per cent rural and the incomes of
these people are generally low. Most are small farmers living in
the hilly interior. Approximately half a million people live in
the capital city of Kingston. Population density overall is high,
around 231 individuals per sq. km. The original inhabitants
were Arawaks; Spanish colonists arrived in 1494 and by 1655
the Indians had all but disappeared, decimated by disease. When
the British took control of the island they brought African slaves

to labour on the plantations and now most of the population are
of African origin. The island became independent in 1962.

Tourism is the country's largest foreign exchange earner.
Main export crops are sugarcane, bananas, citrus and cocoa.
Blue Mountain coffee is also exported. Jamaica is the world's
third largest producer of alumina and bauxite and these are
major sources of income.

The Forests

Jamaica's forests are as species rich as any on the other
Caribbean islands, but not as diverse or as tall as those on the
continent (Kelly et al.. 1988). The first comprehensive account
of the island's plant communities was that of Asprey and
Robbins (1953); their system largely followed that of Beard
(1944, 1955). An updated, expanded classification scheme has
been proposed by Grossman et al., (1992) and expanded on by
Iremonger et al. (in press). However, their vegetation categori-
sation is too detailed to be described here. Similarly, the
detailed descriptions of forest types in the Blue Mountains pro-
vided by Grubb and Tanner (1976) and Tanner (1986) are too
lengthy for inclusion. Instead, most of the following is from the
simphfied version in FAO/UNEP (1981 ).

Wet limestone forests occur mainly between 300 and 750 m
with the largest areas remaining in the Cockpit Country and
John Crow Mountains; other areas are located in Mt Diablo and
on Dolphin Head. Their canopy is more or less closed with a
height of 15-18 ni. though in deep valleys emergents of
Tenninalia tatifolia and Cediela tutorata rise to 25-30 m in
height. Other common large trees include santa maria
Catophyllum brasiliense, Pithecellobium alexandri. breadnut
Brosium alicastritin. sweetwoods Nectandra spp. and bullet-
woods Dipholis spp.. The trees are generally evergreen. A dense
understorey of small trees is present but undergrowth is general-
ly lacking (FAO/UNEP. 1981 ).

Much of the original lower montane rain forest on the Blue
Mountain range has been cleared and there are now only relict

112

Jamaica

patches in inaccessibli; places. This forest type has a canopy of
20-22 m high, though emergcnts such as Psidiiiin inoiuaniiin.
Ficiis sitffocans and Syinphonia f^lohnlifera can reach 40 m.
There is a lower tree layer at 9-15 m and the shrub layer is
sparse. Lianes are uncommon and epiphytes are confined to the
higher branches of trees (FAO/UNEP. 1981).

The upper slopes of the Blue Mountains still have some mon-
tane mist forests on them and elfin woodland is found on the
exposed summits and northern ridges of the range. Montane
mist forest has few emergents and the canopy is only 12-14 ni
high. Dominant trees are Podt>carpus iirbani. Cyrilta raceinifloni
and Alclioinea lulifolia. Tree ferns are frequent. A sub-canopy
is found at 10 m and the shrub layer is scattered. The low
canopied, gnarled trees of which elfin woodland is composed
are covered in many mosses, lichens, ferns and epiphytes.
Chisia cUirendonensis and Clethra nccidentalis are common
(FAO/UNEP. 1981). Also present on the Blue Mountains,
between 750 and 1200 in. is montane sclerophyll forest. This is
a low shrubby community, mostly very disturbed by humans.

There are a number of small areas of swamp forest in the
country with the canopy dominated by Symphonic! globulifera
and Roystonea princeps. Climbers are a prominent feature in
some of the swamps.

Other woody formations found in Jamaica include the dry
limestone forest (see Kapos. 1986) which is a sparse cover of
low forest and tall scrub growing on bare limestone rock. Red
birch Biiiseru siinaruha is common as an emergent tree. In the
few remaining undisturbed areas, mahogany Swietenia maliagoni,
Spondias mombin and Plumiera sp. are found as deciduous
emergents. Most of the vegetation is made up of a diverse array
of small xerophytic trees and shrubs.

Mangroves

Mangroves are more common on the south coast, but most of
the coastal forests have been destroyed and the wetlands drained
(FAO, 1990). FAOAJNEP(198I)givesafigureof 70sq. km for
mangroves around the island. Iremonger et at. (in press) report
only 22 sq. km of mangrove forest, but a further 73 sq. km of
mangrove scrub. Bacon (1993) reports the higher figure of 106
sq. km: this, though, includes areas on offshore islands — he
recorded 101 sites with mangrove. Map 12.1. a simplified ver-
sion of the digital data supplied by Iremonger (see Map
Legend), shows 19 sq. km of mangrove remaining in the country.
Red mangrove Rhizophora mangle is dominant and
frequently can be found in monospecific stands with a canopy
of up to 25 m. Other common species are white mangrove
Lagiinciilaiia racemosa. black mangrove Avicennki geiininans
and buttonwood Conocarpiis erectus.

Forest Resources and Management

Jamaica was almost entirely covered in forest before human set-
tlement in the first century AD and when Columbus discovered
the island in 1494 the island was still substantially forested.
Indeed the name Jamaica is derived from the Arawak word
Xamayca meaning the land of wood and water. Now only the
most inaccessible of the forests are in a pristine condition.
Estimates of the proportion of land under well-stocked natural
forest were 32 per cent in the early 1920s (Zon and Sparhawk,
1923), 18 per cent in the early 1950s (Asprey and Robbins,
1953) and only six per cent in 1980 (FAO. 1988).

In the 1990 National Forestry Action Plan, forests with a
commercial potential were estimated to cover 2670 sq. km. Of
these, only 770 sq. km were natural forest, while 210 sq. km

Reinncinis oj terraces coiislnivlcd ilunng ihe l95Us and 60s with
the forested Main Ridge of the Blue Mountains in the back-
ground. (Mark Aldrich)

were plantations and 1690 (or 63 per cent) were ruinate forests,
ones that had been cut over and the secondary growth had not
attained the status of a developed forest (FAO, 1990). Most of
the relatively undisturbed natural forests and the plantations are
publicly owned, while 80 per cent of the ruinate forests are
under private ownership. FAO ( 1993), using 1985 baseline data,
estimates Jamaica's forest cover (and its closed broadleaved for-
est cover) at 2390 sq. km. This includes forest in the tropical
rain, moist deciduous and hill and montane zone.

The Nature Conservancy (TNC), in conjunction with the
Conservation Data Centre-Jamaica, have recently carried out a
Rapid Ecological Assessment of the island. The main purpose
of this was to provide a classification of Jamaican vegetation
communities and a map of their current extent (Iremonger el
al.. in press). It is these data that have been used as a source
for Map 12.1. Measurements from this map of the different
forest types are shown in Table 12.1 and give a total of 3182
sq. km of forest on the island — a somewhat higher figure
than the 2842 sq. km reported by Iremonger et al. (in press).
As cloud is obscuring parts of the Blue and John Crow
Mountains, there is actually slightly more lower and upper
montane forest than is reported by Iremonger el al. (in press),
or indicated in Table 12.1 and shown on Map 12.1.

113

Jamaica

114

Jamaica

Table 12.1 Estimates of forest extent in Jamaica

Forest type Area (sq. km) % land area

24.5
0.7
0.3

<0.1
3.4
0.3
0.2

Submontane*

2,657

Degraded submontane

Montane

Degraded montane

Dry

363

Swamp

Mangrove

Total

3,182

29.4

* Ttiis includes over 2,000 sq, km of evergreen seasonal forest, much of which may be

disturbed.
Based on analysis of Map 12,1, See Map Legend on p, I 19 for details of sources.

Muchoney et cil. (in press) have looked in more detail at the
Blue and John Crow Mountains National Park, including a 1 km
buffer zone, and give figures for lower and upper montane for-
est as well as the modified formations of each of these. It has
been suggested (S. Iremonger, in litt.) that the figures from
Muchoney et al. (in press) for the montane and lower montane
formations, combined with the evergreen seasonal, dry semi-
evergreen, swamp and mangrove forest from Iremonger et al.
will give the most accurate figure for Jamaica's forest cover
(Table 12.2). However, it must be noted that all these estimates
include modified and secondary forest — there is a much
smaller area of pristine forest left on the island.

The majority of the forest plantations have been established
in the east of the island. Finns caribaea is most commonly used;
these plantations are frequent in the Blue Mountains and in the
centre of Jamaica (Iremonger et al. in press), but a few areas of
hardwood have also been planted. The most successful of these
is blue mahoe Hibiscus elatus. although West Indian mahogany
Swietenia mahagoni. cedar Cedrela odorata and santa maria
Calophyllum antillanuin are also planted. However, most of
these broadleaved plantations now lie idle and are reverting to
secondary forest, or have been underplanted with coffee, as in
the Blue Mountains (Iremonger et al.. in press). The pine plan-
tations, covering 100 sq. km in 1985. are managed by a
Government agency, the Forest Industry Development
Corporation (FIDCO). However, a combination of hurricanes

Table 12.2 Estimates of forest cover on Jamaica

rest type

Area (sq. km)

Lower montane

182

Modified lower montane

104

Upper montane

186

Modified upper montane

Evergreen seasonal

2.112

Dry semi-evergreen

323

Swamp

Mangrove

">1

Total

3.016

Sources: Muchoney er al. (in press); Iremonger et til. (in press).

and fires have made these plantations unprofitable. Indeed, over
a decade, the area of pines ravaged by arson exceeded plantings
by 40 per cent (Eyre, 1991).

Jamaica's National Forestry Action Plan (FAO, 1990)
reported that an estimated 725,441 cu. m of wood was cut for
fuel and charcoal (a very much larger quantity than that reported
in FAO. 1994 and indicated at the head of this chapter). This is
84 per cent of the total wood harvest and is consequently a
major contributor to the loss of forest resources. Charcoal burn-
ing is a US$3.3 million industry, providing employment for
10,000 people (Eyre, 1991). Hardwood made up 10 per cent of
the industrial roundwood produced in 1988, it is used mostly by
the local furniture and building industries. Softwood, five per
cent of the harvest, is also used for building. Poles and posts are
cut from both soft and hard woods (FAO, 1990). There are
around 150 sawmills in the country, cutting rough timber of
poor quality with low levels of efficiency and high wastage
(FAO, 1990). Timber felling is not subject to licence and many
of the mills are not registered. Only 20 per cent of the country's
timber needs are met locally and imports are increasing
(Headley and Thompson, 1986).

Although forest reserves were developed on Crown Lands
over 100 years ago, funds were not provided to effect the pro-
posals and the laws supporting the reserves were repealed. An
Afforestation Law was passed in 1927, the Blue Mountain
Forest Reserve was gazetted and a Forest Officer appointed,
but, again, lack of funds prevented the implementation of the
law. The Forest Act of 1937 repealed and replaced the
Afforestation Law and since then there has been no revision or
amendment to the Act (FAO, 1990). The forest reserves lack
management plans and the authority for protection and develop-
ment of these areas has, in the past, not been clear. Major prob-
lems stem from the lack of a formally constituted national sys-
tem of protected areas, no legal requirement for environmental
impact assessments and the ineffective implementation of envi-
ronmental laws.

In response to the environmental situation, the sector of the
Jamaican government concerned with the environment recently
underwent some rearrangement. This was the result of the
Protected Areas Resource Conservation Project (PARC) a joint
effort of the Planning Institute of Jamaica (representing the
country's government) and USAID. This project was initiated in
1989 and was designed to promote tourism and sustainable
development, as well as protect biological diversity on the
island. The Forestry and Soil Conservation Department (FSCD)
of the Ministry of Agriculture which was responsible for devel-
opment, research and protection of forest resources, is now also
responsible for the Blue Mountain/John Crow Mountain
National Park, The Natural Resource Conservation Authority
(NRCA) superseded the Natural Resources Conservation
Department (NRCD). and became the primary agency for
national environmental management. NRCA is part of the
newly created Ministry of Tourism and the Environment. Its
brief includes enforcement of the Act protecting the country's
wildlife.

Deforestation

Concern about the adverse impact of excessive deforestation
was expressed in Jamaica as long ago as 1885 when E.D.M.
Hooper of the Indian Forest Service reported to the government
on the situation (Swaby, 1945).

Jamaica has been a considerable exporter of fine timbers, but
this does not seem to have been a major cause of deforestation.

115

Jamaica

Basic soil consenulioii inccisures using hainhiHi ciin/ wooden poles.

(Mark Aldrich)

Those exported inLludcLl West Indian mahogany, ebony Biya
eheniis, and Hgnum vitae Gnaiaciini officinale, as well as dye-
woods such as fustic Chlorophora tinaoria. logwood
Haeniatoxyhim campechianiim and braziletto Pellophonint
hrasiliense. At higher elevations in the Blue Mountains, the cul-
tivation of Cinchona spp. for quinine was another element in
forest destruction, but also never a major one.

In a report published in 1990. FAO estimated that Jamaica's
forests were disappearing at a rate of 3.0 per cent per annum.
However, in the recent FAO (1993) publication. Forest
resources assessment 1990. the rate of deforestation in
Jamaica between the years of 1981 and 1990 is estimated at
7.2 per cent per year, considerably higher than in any of the
other countries covered in this Atlas. This rate represents an
annual loss of 268 sq. km.

Clearing for settlement and agricultural land has always been
the main cause of deforestation on the island. The forests are
presently being diminished for subsistence crop cultivation and
pasture, for charcoal production and for the establishment of
plantations of exotic pine and coffee. In areas surveyed by Eyre
(1987), commercial lumber production constituted only a small
portion of the deforestation that had occurred between the years
of 1980 and 1986, the main cause was cultivation by the rural
people (Table 12.3).

Hurricanes have also caused some damage to the island's for-
est; the last one to do so was Hurricane Gilbert in September
1988. The severity of the damage caused led to UNDP imple-
menting their "Forestry Rehabilitation Programme" on the
island. After this hurricane, there were 500 new landslides
mapped along 100 km of road (Eyre, 1991 ).

Between 1980 and 1988. 20 sq. km of coffee were planted in

the Blue Mountains with approximately 9 sq. km of this replac-
ing natural forests and plantations in the Yallahs watershed
alone. The land-clearing operations and road construction are
frequently poorly done and create intense surface erosion and
landslides. For instance, over 400 million tonnes of soil were
lost by erosion between the years of 1981 and 1990 — a rate of
13.071 tonnes per sq. kin per year and. islandwide. over 200
major landslides have been reported, almost all of them due to
deforestation (Eyre. 1991 ).

Indeed, one of the most serious aspects of deforestation is the
clearing of steep, unstable slopes for cultivation. This has
occuiTed particularly in the tract of forest northwest of Lluidas

Table 12.3 Causes of deforestation between the years of 1980 and
1986 in 55.7 sq. km of sin\cyed forest.

Cause of deforestation

Peasant agriculture

Pasture

Coffee

Residential etc.

Horticulture

Logging and fuel wood

Bananas

Marijuana

Other commercial agriculture

Conifer plantations

Percentage of deforested land 1986

52.2
11.0
9.3
8.8
6.5
4.5
2.9
2.7

0.2

NB in some places Ihc principal cause of deforeslalion could nol be identified.

; Eyre 1 1987)

116

Jamaica

Vale in St Catherine parish and places in Mount Rosanna Range
(Eyre, 1987). Even if adequate funding were forthcoming for
forest conservation/regeneration, the severity of soil erosion and
consequent degradation is such that traditional plantation prac-
tises may not be suitable. Almost all the soil conservation pro-
jects on the island have ended in failure (Eyre. 1991 ).

Biodiversity

The Jamaican landmass moved eastwards with the Proto-
Antillean island arc but. unlike Cuba and Hispaniola, Jamaica
was completely submerged from the late Middle Eocene to the
early Middle Miocene and emerged only 10-15 million years
ago. The island has never been connected to the North
American mainland and it did not rejoin any of the other
islands, consequently endemism on Jamaica is high. Indeed, the
country ranks among the first ten islands of the world for degree
of endemism; about 27 or 28 per cent of the approximately 3000
species of flowering plant are endemic (Adams, 1972: Proctor,
1982: Kelly, 1988). Of these endemics, 256 are listed as threat-
ened, of which 52 are apparently extinct (Kelly. 1991). The
Pteridophyte llora is also rich with 579 species and 82 endemics
(Adams, 1990; Davis et a/., 1986). Numerous (47) local
endemics are found in the isolated limestone massif of the John
Crow Mountains (Kelly, 1988). Proctor (1986) reports the
occurrence of 101 endemic vascular plants in Cockpit Country
and a further five that are found there and nowhere else in
Jamaica.

The country has 24 native mammal species of which all but
one are bats: three or four of the bat species are endemic includ-
ing Ariiheiis flavescens. Phyllonycteris aphylla and Eptesiciis
lyniii (Johnson. 1988; CEP. 1987). The endemic hutia
Geocaproiuys browiiii is threatened by over hunting and habitat
destruction.

Over 250 species of birds have been recorded in Jamaica
(CEP, 1987; Downer and Sutton, 1990), though only 106 extant
native species breed there (Wiley, 1990). There are at least 25
(AOU, 1983; Johnson, 1988) and maybe 27 (Lack, 1976: CEP.
1987; Haynes et al., 1989) single-island endemics. Five species
are listed as threatened by Collar et al. (1992) of which two
endemics, the Jamaican petrel Pterodroma caribbaea and
Jamaican pauraque Siphonorhis americanus. may be extinct.
The other threatened species are the West Indian whistling-duck
Dendrocygnci arborea. the plain pigeon Colitmba inornata and
the endemic ring-tailed pigeon Coluinba caribaea. The pigeons
are threatened by hunting and habitat loss.

There are 27 single-island endemic reptiles and another four
shared with a few other islands (Schwartz and Thomas. 1975;
Schwartz et a/.. 1978). The Jamaican boa Epicrutes siibflavus is
listed as vulnerable by lUCN. while the black racer Alsophis
ater is endangered (Groombridge. 1993). The endemic
Jamaican iguana Cyclura collet, assumed to be extinct or
exceedingly rare, was rediscovered in the Hellshire Hills in
1990 (Oryx, 1991). Other reptiles listed as threatened by lUCN
are Celestus duqitesneyL C. fowleri and C. inicniblepharis. The
endangered American crocodile Crocodyhis aciitiis also occurs
on Jamaica and there are five species of marine turtles in the
area, only three nest on the island. Schwartz and Thomas (1975)
record 20 amphibians endemic to Jamaica. Schwartz and
Henderson (1991) give distributions, descriptions and the
natural history of the Caribbean's amphibians and reptiles.

Little is known about numbers or status of the fish and inver-
tebrates on the island. Two endemic swallowtail butterflies, the
Homerus Papilio homenis and the Jamaican kite Eiirylide.s iiiar-

cellinus. are listed as threatened in Collins and Morris (1985)
and another six threatened invertebrates are listed by lUCN
(Groombridge. 1993). Information on some other invertebrates
is given in Farr ( 1984).

Conservation Areas

There is no legislation in Jamaica to authorise the establishment
of national parks and other protected areas. There is, however,
some legislation covering specific aspects of environmental
management. This includes laws covering marine protected
areas under the Beach Control Act, caves and monuments under
the Jamaican Natural Heritage Trust Act, game sanctuaries and
watershed areas under the Wildlife Protection Act, forest pro-
tection and tree preservation orders under the Forestry Act and
the Town and Country Planning Act, and fish sanctuaries under
the Fishing Industry Act.

There have been about 40 protected areas, mostly forest
reserves, proposed or ""gazetted" (without boundaries) in
Jamaica since the 1930s, but these are not managed or pro-
tected. They may be invaded by squatters, leased for coffee
growing or be plantation areas. Some of these are described in
CEP (1987).

Although there is a national park on the island — Blue
Mountain/John Crow Mountain — this has an lUCN category
of Vlll and is. therefore, not shown on Map 12.1. It was created
recently as a result of the first stage of the PARC project. It is
780 sq. km and contains Jamaica's largest expanse of continu-
ous, undisturbed forest. FSCD is responsible for the manage-
ment of this park. There is also one marine park. Montego Bay
(15 sq. km — not mapped), developed as a pilot management
activity and controlled by NRCA.

The Jamaica Conservation and Development Trust (JCDT), a
NGO formed in 1987. is dedicated to the promotion and finan-
cial support of national parks in the country, to setting up a
National Park Trust Fund and to assisting in the development of
a national park system plan.

Initiatives for Conservation

The National Environmental Societies Trust (NEST), which is an
umbrella organisation for environmental NGOs and community
based organisations, was established in 1989 and cuirently com-
prises 22 supporting members. These include JCDT. the Gosse
Bird Club and the Natural History Society of Jamaica. In 1991,
NEST became the National Committee of UNEP.

A Jamaican Environmental Strategy was developed in 1991
with the support of USAID. The Strategy provided an analytical
background for the design of the DEMO Project. This project
was devised to confer a framework for USAID collaboration
with a wide range of interested parties in the government and
private sector. It was concerned with addressing institutional
deficiencies and the need to focus attention on the management
of the natural resource base as the precondition for future eco-
nomic growth. The ultimate goal of the project is to promote
stable, sustainable economic development. Its purpose is to
strengthen the capabilities of public and private environmental
organisations to manage Jamaica's natural resources.

As part of the DEMO project. NRCA. which is responsible
for the centralisation of all environmental activities for the
Government of Jamaica, is receiving assistance in environmen-
tal policy reform, strategic planning, organisational develop-
ment, financial management and enforcement of environmental
regulations.

Other DEMO project components include institutional sup-

117

Jamaica

port to NEST and other Jamaican NGOs; development of field
activities in selected "areas of environmental concern", starting
in Negril and Montego Bay; and expansion of the national parks
and protected areas, this is PARC II — the second phase of the
Protected Areas Resource Conservation (PARC), planned to
build on the successes of phase one. The first task of PARC II
will be to manage the two existing national parks while the sec-
ond major objective is to develop proposals to establish and
manage additional parks in other pristine areas. Among the
leading candidates for early inclusion are the Black River wet-
lands areas.

In addition to USAID. several international bodies are active-
ly participating in the development and organisation of

Jamaica's environmental sector. Among the most important are
the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA). the
Organisation of American States (OAS), UNEP. TNC and
WWF.

A Conservation Data Centre has recently been established by
the University of the West Indies, the Planning Institute of
Jamaica, JCDT and TNC. This will allow the systematic collec-
tion, storage and dissemination of data on the island" s tlora and
fauna.

A National Forestry Action Plan, under the auspices of the
Tropical Forestry Action Plan, was initiated in 1989 at the
request of the Jamaican government. The resulting report con-
tains 30 project proposals (FAO, 1990).

References

Adams, CD. (1972). Flowering Plants of .Icinuiicn. University

of West Indies, Mona. Pp. 848.
Adams. CD. (1990). Phytogeography of Jamaica. In:

Biogeographicul Aspects of Insularity. Accademia Nazionale

de Lincei, Rome. Pp. 681-693.
AOU (1983). Check-list of North American Birds 6th edition.

American Ornithologists' Union.
Asprey, G.F. and Robbins, R.G. (1953). The vegetation of

Jamaica. Ecological Monographs 23: 359-412.
Bacon, P.R. (1993). Mangroves in the Lesser Antilles, Jamaica,

Trinidad and Tobago. In: Conservation and Sustainable

Utilization of Mangrove Forests in Latin America and Africa

Regions. Part I: Latin America. ITTO/ISME Project

PDl 1 4/90(F). Pp. 155-209.
Beard, J.S. (1944). Climax vegetation in tropical America.

Ecology 25: 127-158.
Beard, J.S. (1955). The classification of tropical American veg-
etation types. Ecology 36; 89-100.
CEP ( 1987). Connliy Environmental Profile: Jamaica. Prepared

on behalf of IIED by the Natural Resources Conservation

Division, Ministry of Agriculture and Ralph M. Field

Associates, Inc., Kingston Jamaica.
Collar, N.J., Gonzaga, L.P., Krabbe. N., Madrono Nieto, A..

Naranjo, L.G., Parker III, T.A. and Wege, DC. (1992).

Threatened Birds of the Americas. The ICBP/IUCN Red Data

Book. ICBP. Cambridge, U.K.
Collins, N.M. and Morris, M.G. (1985). Threatened Swallowtail

Butleiflies of the World: The lUCN Red Data Book. lUCN,

Gland, Switzerland and Camnridge, U.K.
Davis, S.D., Droop, S.J.M., Gregerson. P., Henson, L., Leon,

C.J., Villa-Lobos, J.L, Synge, H. and Zantovska, J. (1986).

Plants in Danger. What do we know? lUCN, Gland,

Switzerland and Cambridge, U.K.
Downer, A. and Sutton, R. (1990). Birds of Jamaica: a photo-
graphic field guide. Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge, U.K.
Eyre, L.A. (1987). Jamaica: test case for tropical deforestation?

Ambio 16(6): 338-343.
Eyre, L.A. (1991). Jamaica's crisis in forestry and watershed

management. Jamaica Naturalist 1(1): 27-34.
FAO/UNEP (1981). Proyecto de Evaluacion de los Reciirsos

Forestales Tropicales. Los Recursos Forestales de la

Amaerica Tropical. FAO, Rome, Italy.
FAO (1988). An Interim Report on the State of the Forest

Resources in the Developing Countries. FAO, Rome, Italy.
FAO (1990). National Forestry Action Plan: Jamaica. Main

report with project profiles and budgets. Government of

Jamaica, UNDP, FAO, Kingston, Jamaica. Technical report -
FOD:JAM/88/016.

FAO ( 1993). Forest resources assessment 1990: Tropical coun-
tries. FAO Forestry paper 1 12. FAO, Rome Italy.

FAO ( 1994). FAO Yearbook: Forest Products 1981-1992. FAO
Forestry series No. 27, FAO Statistics Series No. 1 16. FAO,
Rome, Italy.

Farr, T. (1984). Land animals of Jamaica. Origins and
endemism. Jamaican Journal 17( 1 ): 38—48.

Groombridge, B. (Ed.) (1993). 1994 lUCN Red List of
Threatened Animals. lUCN, Gland. Switzerland and
Cambridge, U.K. 286 pp.

Grossman. D.H., Iremonger, S. and Muchoney, D.M. (1992)
Jamaica: A Rapid Ecological Assessment. Phase I. An
Island-Wide Characterization and Mapping of Natural
Communities and Modified Vegetation Types. The Nature
Conservancy, Virginia, U.S.A. Pp. 41.

Grubb, P.J. and Tanner, E.V.J. (1976). The montane forests and
soils of Jamaica: a reassessment. Journal of the Arnold
Arboretum 57; 313-368.

Haynes, A.M., Sutton, R.L. and Harvey, K.D. (1989).
Conservation trends, and the threats to endemic birds in
Jamaica. In: Biogeography of the West Indies: past present
and future. Woods, CA. (ed). Sandhill Crane Press Inc.,
Gainseville, Florida.

Headley, M.V. and Thompson, D.A. (1986). Forest management
in Jamaica. In: Forests of Jamaica. Thompson, D., Bretting,
P. and Humphries, M. (eds). The Jamaican Society of
Scientists and Technologists, Kingston, Jamaica, Pp. 91—96.

Iremonger, S., Muchoney, D., Wright, R. (in press). Januiican
Vegetation Types: a new classification and map.

Johnson. T.H. (1988). Biodiversity and Conservation in the
Caribbean: profiles of selected islands. ICBP Monograph
No. 1, ICBP, Cambridge, U.K.

Kapos, V. (1986). Dry limestone forests of Jamaica. In: Forests
of Jamaica. Thompson, D., Bretting, P. and Humphries, M.
(eds). The Jamaican Society of Scientists and Technologists,
Kingston, Jamaica. Pp. 49-58.

Kelly, D.L. ( 1988). The threatened flowering plants of Jamaica.
Biological Conservation 46: 201—216.

Kelly, D.L. (1991). The threatened flowering plants of Jamaica:
a reappraisal. Jamaica Naturalist 1(1): 19-26.

Kelly, D.L., Tanner. E.V.J., Kapos, V., Dickinson, T.A.,
Goodfriend, G.A. and Fairburn, P. (1988). Jamaican lime-
stone forests: floristics, structure and environment of three
examples along a rainfall gradient. Journal of Tropical
Ecology 4: 121-156.

118

Jamaica

Lack, D. (1976). Island Biology. Blackwell. Oxford.
Muchoney, D.M., Iremonger, S. and Wright. R. (in press). A

Rapid Ecological Assessment of the Blue tuul John Crow

Mountains National Park Jiunuica. The Nature Conservancy.

Virginia, U.S.A.
Oryx ( 199! ). Jamaican iguana rediscovered. Orv.v 25: 133.
Proctor, G.R. ( 1982). More additions to the flora of Jamaica. J.

Arnold. Arbor. 63(3): 199-315.
Proctor, G.R. (1986). Cockpit Country and its vegetation. In:

Forests of Jamaica. Thompson, D., Bretting. P. and

Humphries, M. (eds). The Jamaican Society of Scientists and

Technologists, Kingston, Jamaica. Pp. 43^7.
Schwartz. A. and Henderson. R.W. (1991). Amphibians and

Reptiles of the West Indies: Descriptions, Distributions and

Natural History. University of Florida Press, Gainesville.
Schwartz, A. and Thomas. R. (1975). A Checklist of West

Indian Amphibians and Reptiles. Carnegie Museum of

Natural History, Pittsburgh.
Schwartz, A., Thomas. R. and Ober. L.D. (1978). First

Supplement to a Checklist of West Indian Amphibians and

Reptiles. Carnegie Museum of Natural History. Pittsburgh.
Swaby, C. (1945). Forestry in Jamaica. Forestry Bulletin No. 1.

Forestry Department, Jamaica.
Tanner, E.V.J. (1986). Forests of the Blue Mountains and the

Port Royal Mountains of Jamaica. In: Forests of Jamaica.

Thompson. D., Bretting, P. and Humphries. M. (eds). The

Jamaican Society of Scientists and Technologists, Kingston,

Jamaica. Pp. 15-30, 127-132.
Wiley, J.W. (1990). A profile of Jamaica and its birds. El Pitirre

3(1): 2-6.
Zon. R. and Sparhawk, W.N. (1923). Forest Resources of the

World. Volume 1. McGraw-Hill. New York.

Author: Caroline Harcourt. Cambridge and Jose Ottenwalder,
Florida Museum of Natural History with contributions from
E.V.J. Tanner, The Botany School. Cambridge. Dan Chalmers.
Taverham. Norfolk and Mark Aldrich. Cambridge.

Map 12.1 Jamaica

Digital data of Jamaica's vegetation were kindly made available by Doug
Muchoney and Susan Iremonger ofTNC, who. with Robb Wright and in collabora-
tion with the Conservation Data Centre — Jamaica, have compiled vegetation cover
information for the whole of the country, A written report titled. Jamaican
Vegeiaiion Types: a new classification and map (in press), details the findings of
their data collection and research. The vegetation classes were mapped using
Landsat TM satellite imagery (1988-89). supplemented by digital and hard copy
maps of the island's soils, geology and elevation. As a result of this work, as well as
extensive fieldwork and analysis of the literature, they have produced a comprehen-
sive classification of the island's vegetation.

The classification scheme is hierarchical and is grouped into four major formations:
closed forests, woodlands, scrub and herbaceous communities. Only the higher cate-
gories in the classification are mapped in this source datasei, although a few copies of
the islandwide vegetation have been produced in greater detail and at a scale of
1:250.000.

Map 12.1 illustrates the natural closed forest communities and includes only I 1 of
the higher categories within the TNC classification, including occurrence of cloud.
The patch of lowland rain forest, a tiny area on the north-west coast near Portland, is
obscured by cloud and therefore is not shown.

The following forest types have been harmonised into the broad forest classes used
in [his Atlas

Submontane rain forest:

Degraded submontane rain forest:
Montane rain forest:

Degraded montane rain forest:

Dry forest:

inland swamp forest:

Mangrove:

Lx>wei moniane rain forest over limestone: Lower
montane forest over shale: Evergreen seasonal

forest

Modifu'tl lower montane rainforest

Upper montane rain forest over shale: Upper
montane rain forest over limesttme

Modified upper montane rainforest

Dry semi-evergreen forest

Swamp forest

Mangr(}ve forest

The wet limestone forest of the Cockpit country {Evergreen seasonal forest — mesic
forest over Innestone) also includes modified formations. The forests in the Cockpit
range generally occur between 300-1000 m, therefore these forests have been grouped
under a submontane heading. The dry forest also includes modified or degraded for-
mations.

Mapped conservation areas were derived from spatial data held on t1le at WCMC.

119

13 Lesser Antilles

ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA

DOMINICA

)

Country oreo 440 sq. km

Country area 750 sq km

Land areo 440sq. km

Land area 750sq. km

•\

Population (mid- 1994) 01 million

Population (mid-1994) 01 million

t-^ "*^~.

Population growth rate 1 2 per cent

Population growth rate 1 3 pec cenI

^ j^X-

Populotion projected to 2025 01 million
Gross national product per capita (1992)

USS4870

Population projected to 2025 01 million
Gross national product per capita (1992)

USS2520

-' - ■" ^- -, .

Forest cover in 1 990 (FAO, 1 993a) 100

sq km

Forest cover in 1 990 (FAO, 1 993a) 440

sq. km

x^^

Annual deforestation rate (1981-1990)

Annual deforestation rote (1981-1990)

0.7 pec tent

Industrial roundwood production —

Industriol roundwood exports —
Fuelwood and charcoal production —

Industrial roundwood exports —
Fuelwood and charcoal production —

Processed wood production —

Processed wood exports —

GRENADA

Processed wood exports —

GUADELOUPE

MARTINIQUE

Country area 340 sq km

Country area )7]0sq. km

iountry area 1100 sq km

Land area 340 sq km

Land area I690sq. km

.and area 1060 sq. km

Population (niid-1994) 01 million

Population (mid- 1 994) 4 million

Population (mid- 1994) 4 million

Population growth rate 2 5percem

Population growth rate I 2 per cent

Population growth rote 1,1 percent

Population projected to 2025 2 million

Population projected to 2025 0.5 million

'opulotion projected to 2025 4 million

Gross notional product per capita (1992)

USS2310

Gross notional product per copita (1992)

USS4539

Gross notional product per capita (1992)

USS4223

Forest cover in 1 990 (FAO, 1 993o) 60 s

.km

Forest cover in 1 990 (FAO, 1 993a) 930

q. km

Forest cover in 1 990 (FAO, 1 993a) 430

q. km

Annuol deforestation rote (1981-1990)

+4.3 pec ceni

Annual deforestation rote (1981-1990)

0.3 per (enl

Annual deforestation rate (1981-1990)

0.5 per cent

Industrial roundwood production —

Industrial roundwood production 7000 cu

ndustriol roundwood production 3000 cu

Industrial roundwood exports —

ndustriol roundwood exports —

Fuelwood and charcoal production —

Fuelwood and charcoal production 1 5,00(

cu. m

'uelwood and charcoal production ]0,00(

cu. m

Processed wood production —

Processed wood production 1 000 cu. m

Processed wood production 1000 cum

Processed wood exports —

'recessed wood exports —

ST KITTS AND NEVIS

ST LUCIA

T VINCENT AND GRENADINES

Country area 272 sq. km

Country area 620 sq, km

Country area 390 sq km

Land area 272 sq. km

Lond area 6IOsq. km

Land area 390 sq km

Population (mid- 1 994) 04 million

Population (mid- 1994) 1 million

Population (mid-1994) 01 million

Population growth rate 1 .3 per cent

Population growth rate 2 pec cent

Population growth cote I 7 per cent

Population projected to 2025 01 million

Population projected to 2025 2 million

'opulotion pcojected to 2025 01 million

Gross national product per capita (1992)

USS3990

Gross notional product per capita (1992)

USS2900

jross notional product per capita (1992)

USS1990

Forest cover in 1 990 (FAO, 1 993a) 1 30

q km

Forest cover in 1 990 (FAO, 1 993a) 50 sq

. km

orest cover in 1990 (FAO, 1993a) 110

q. km

Annual deforestation rate (1981-1990)

Annual deforestation rote (1981-1990)

5 2 pec cent

Annual deforestation rate (1981-1990)

2.1 percent

Industrial roundwood production —

ndustriol roundwood production —

Industrial roundwood exports —

ndustriol roundwood exports —

Fuelwood and charcoal production —

uelwood ond charcoal production —

Processed wood production —

'rocessed wood production —

Processed wood exports —

'rocessed wood exports —

The islands of the Lesser Antilles considered here cover in total a very small area compared with most of the other
countries or regions dealt with in this volume. They comprise several different countries or colonies which, although
politically separate, share several important characteristics.

Floristically and physiognomically the forests of the archipelago form a single unit, albeit one with a large number
of different plant associations within it. This unit is characterised by moderate species richness and a high degree of
endemism. with nearly 25 per cent of the tree species of the Lesser Antilles being endemic to the region. Most of these
are found on more than one island, although there are also significant numbers of single-island endemics. This high
level of regional endemism is also reflected in the fauna and other components of the flora.

The islands also share many similar problems in the conservation and management of their forest resources. In com-
mon with other island ecosystems, they have shown themselves to be vulnerable to disturbance from humans. The
region has been inhabited for at least 6000 years and during this time a significant part of the original fauna has been
exterminated, almost certainly as a result of mankind's activities. It is not clear whether plant species have suffered

«V.

12(J

Lesser Antilles

similar extinction rates. However, it is evident that there has been large scale disturbance and destruction of natural
habitats, including the forest ecosystems which are believed to have originally covered most of the islands. Habitat
destruction has been most marked since the region was settled by European colonists in the early 1 6th century. Most
clearance has been for agricultural production. Remnant forest areas are generally in montane, inaccessible areas.

Introduction

The Lesser Antilles comprises a chain of islands running in an
arc from the easternmost point of the Greater Antilles to the
north-eastern part of South America. The islands of the princi-
pal arc are volcanic and mountainous: the outlying islands are
composed mainly of limestone and are of low relief (Table
13.1). Volcanoes on three of the islands (Martinique,
Guadeloupe and St Vincent) have erupted this century.

Putney ( 1982) records the largest remaining contiguous areas
of relatively unaltered ecosystems on the islands of the Lesser
Antilles. Table 13.2 gives his figures for mangroves, moist, rain
and cloud forest. He adds the caution that the boundaries
between the vegetation types have not been drawn using consis-
tent criteria for all the islands so that the area of each should be
considered a relative indication of approximate magnitude, not
as an exact figure.

The eight Lesser Antillean countries that Putney (1982) and
FAO (1993a) list as containing forest will be briefly described
here. They are: Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica. Grenada.
Guadeloupe, Martinique, St Kitts and Nevis, St Lucia and St
Vincent and the Grenadines.

Tourism, agriculture and fisheries are the major economic
activities on these islands and they are all dependent on the
integrity of the natural resource base.

The Forests

Floristically and physiognomically the forests of the entire
Lesser Antillean archipelago form a single unit, albeit one with
a large number of different plant associations within it. There
are minor geographical variations in tloristic composition owing
to the differences in range of some of the component species
and the occurrence of localized endemics on some islands or
combinations of islands (see Figure 13.1 ).

The natural vegetation of the Lesser Antilles has been com-
prehensively described by Beard ( 1949). This remains the stan-
dard work on the subject in English and most subsequent

Table 13.2 Largest remaining contiguous areas of relatively unal-
tered ecosystems in the Lesser Antilles

Forest type/place

Island

Area
(sq. km)

MANGROVES

Eastern Central Grand Cul de Sac Marin

Guadeloupe

Fort de France Bay

Martinique

->~i

Codrington Lagoon

Barbuda

Northeastern Coast

.iXntigua

MOIST FOREST

Southern

Dominica

Central

Guadeloupe

Central

Martinique

Northwest of Mt Pelee

Martinique

Central Western

St Lucia

Mt Misery

St Kitts

Southwestern

St Vincent

Central eastern

St Vincent

Ne% is Peak

Nevis

RAIN FOREST

Central

Guadeloupe

123

Central

Dominica

Piton du Corbet/Mt Pelee

Martinique

Central

St Lucia

Central

St Vincent

Central

Grenada

CLOUD FOREST

Morne Trois Pilons

Dominica

46,

Central

St Vincent

Mt Misery

St Kitts

Morne Diablotin

Dominica

Soufriere

Guadeloupe

Central

Grenada

Mt Pelee

Martinique

Western central

Martinique

Table 13.1 Islands of the Lesser Antilles (from north to south)

Smine: Pulney (1982)

Main volcanic arc

Saba

St Eustatius

St Kitts

Nevis

Redonda

Montserrat

Guadeloupe

Les Saints

Dominica

Martinique

St Lucia

St Vincent

The Grenadines

Grenada

Smirtc: Howard (1989)

Area in

Limestone islands

Area in

sq. km

Sombrero

Anguilla

174

St Martin

St Bartholomew

Barbuda

Antigua

280

1.603

La Desirade

Marie Galante

155

787

Barbados

430

984

604

337

130

311

descriptions of the Lesser Antillean forests are derived from it.
The following is a brief summary.

Lowland rain forest

Lowland rain forest (refened to by Beard purely as rain forest)
is found at elevations of between about 60 and 1000 m, usually
on sites sheltered from the prevailing wind.

Climax rain forest has an uppermost stratum forming a more
or less closed canopy at 28-35 m, a discontinuous middle layer
of trees at I 2-25 m and a lower tree layer at 5-12 m. There are
shrub, sub-shrub and ground layers although in general the for-
est is relatively open underneath the canopy. There are 3(.)0-370
trees of 10 cm dbh per hectare.

Dacryodes excelsa is the principal dominant, accounting for
up to 40 per cent of the standing crop on some islands. Other
dominant species include Sloanea dentata, S. tnmcata. S. berte-
ricina. Poiiteria senwcarpifoliu. P. multiflora, Chimarrbis

121

Lesser Antilles

Figure 13.1 An idealised transect through a Caribbean island in the Lesser Antilles.

Suiinc- Lugo « a/. (1981)

cymosa, Diissia martinicciisis, Talaiima dodecapetala. OrmosUi
monosperma, Meliosma Iwrhertii. Hyenmiiiia carihaect. Phoebe
elongata and Beilschmiedia pendiila.

A variety of second growth communities following destruc-
tion of the forest can be recognized, of which the most readily
distinguished are: tree-fern brake, dominated by groves of
Cyalliea aihorea and Heiuitelia grandifolia; Mieouia thicket,
dominated by Miconia guicmensis: and pioneer forest, dominated
in the initial stages by species such as Cecropia peltata.
Ochroma lagopus. Hibiscus tiilipiflonis. Frezieni hiisiiia and
Aemistiis arborescens and at later stages by members of the
Lauraceae, notably Necrandra antitlami and Ocolea leiicoxylon.

Montane Formations

There are marked changes in forest physiognomy and floristic
composition between the lowland forests and those at higher
altitudes. However, the distribution of the different montane for-
mations appears to be determined by exposure to wind rather
than by changes in temperature or rainfall with altitude.

a. Lower montane rain forest

Lower montane rain forest is found on mountain slopes and
ridges from 60 m to 500 m elevation, generally more or less
exposed to the wind. It is dominated by a variable though
closed and often very dense stratum of trees 20-30 m in
height, below which is an understorey of trees up to 12 m in
height. Shrub, sub-shrub and ground layers also occur, merg-
ing into each other and into the lower tree storey.

The major dominants are Licania teniatensis and
O.xylhece pallida, with Ainanoa caribaea locally important
(e.g. in the wetter parts of Dominica where it is the common-
est species in this formation). Other dominants are
Dacryodes excelsa, Tapura antillana. Ternstoemia oligosre-
mon, Micropholis chryosphylloides, Manilkara bidentata.
Guatteria caribaea. Sloaiiea caribaea. Sterculia caribaea.

Diospyros ebenaster and Symphonia globidifera. Palms of the
genus Euterpe are among the commonest understorey trees.

Second growth on cleared areas is essentially similar to
that of the rain forest described above although tree-fern
brake and Miconia thicket are commoner than pioneer forest.

Montane thicket

Typical montane thicket is found on ridge tops and steep
slopes facing to windward, between elevations of around 300
m and 600 m. It generally has a dense canopy of around
12-20 m height composed largely of slender trees (under 1 m
girth) with small crowns at a density of from 500 to nearly
900 stems over 0.3 m girth per hectare. There is virtually no
woody understorey. There is a heavy growth of moss on the
trees and ground, and there are large numbers of epiphytes. A
slightly atypical form is found on Dominica on swampy flats
of 450-600 m elevation. It is distinguished by an open
canopy, markedly thin stems and small crowns and the pres-
ence of aerial roots on over half the trees.

Montane thicket has a much less consistent species compo-
sition across the different islands of the Lesser Antilles than
do lower montane rain forest and (lowland) rain forest.
Typical component species are Micropholis chiysophylloides,
Richeria grandis, Podocarpus coriaceus. Byrsonima martini-
censis. Licania oligamha. Tovomitu plumieri. Myrica spp.,
/le.x spp, Cyrilla racemiflora. Pisonia fragrcms. Hedyosmum
arborescens. Rondeletia spp., Rapanea guianensis. Licania
teniatensis and Cassipourea elliplica.

Palm brake

Palm brake appears to be a natural community sub-climax to
montane thicket and is found on ridge tops and steep slopes
facing windward between 300 and 600 m. The forest is not
stratified, nor is there a true canopy but rather agglomera-
tions of trees occurring in patches of different heights, from

122

Lesser Antilles

6 111 lo 20 111, averaging around 12 ni. Two-thirds of the trees
are pahns of the genus Eiilerpc. with the mountain cabbage
Euterpe globosa being dominant and characteristic on most
islands. Other trees present are both elfin woodland and rain
forest species, including Sloanea inincatu. Richeria f-ranclis.
Marila racemosa, Hedyosmiim arborescens, Fieziera undii-
lala. F. hirsuta. Ilex sideroxyloides, Dacryodes excelsu.
Bxisoniiua nunliiiiceiisis. Micropholis chrysophylloides.
Micdiiici i>iiiauensis. Nectandra and Ocotea spp.

There is no shrub layer, but the herbaceous ground layer is
usually very luxuriant.

d. Elfin woodland

Elfin woodland is the highest of the montane formations and
occurs on the summits and upper slopes of the principal peaks
and ridges, above 450 m and usually above 600 m. in areas
which are continuously wet and severely e.xposed to wind.

There is a single woody stratum of low. gnarled, almost
impenetrable epiphyte-covered trees 3-6 m in height.
Dominance is not consistent from island to island, although
Didxinopanax atteniiatum and several Chariaiithus species
are the most regularly found common trees. On some islands
(notably Gaudeloupe and Dominica) Chisia venosa is the
principal dominant, forming half the standing crop.

Seasonal Formations

Beard noted that because of the pressure of cultivation there
were no longer any undamaged examples of forests in dry or
seasonal areas in the Lesser Antilles. Nevertheless several dif-
ferent forest types could be conjectured to have existed on the
basis of more or less damaged remnants.

a. Seasonal evergreen forest

Two areas of what appeared to have been evergreen seasonal
forest were recorded, in northern Martinique and at Morne
Delice in Grenada, both areas being below 300 m with an
annual rainfall of 2000 mm or more. The principal domi-
nants in the former were Andira inermis and Lonchocarpiis
latifolius. in the latter Manilkara bidentara. Bucltenavia cap-
itata and Tabebitia pallida. These areas appeared to be
unique in the Lesser Antilles.

b. Semi-evergreen seasonal forest

Forests of this type, all now disturbed, appear to have been
considerably more widespread than seasonal evergreen forests.
being found for example in Barbados (Turner's Hall Wood). St
Vincent (King's Hill forest). St Lucia (Gros Piton). Cannouan
and Carriacou (the Grenadines), south-west Dominica.
Antigua ( Walling' s Reservoir) and southern Maninique. The.se
areas are generally below 200 m elevation with 130-200 cm
annual rainfall and a moderately severe dry season.

Dominants, which vary in importance in different sites,
include Hymenaea coitrbaril, Inga laurina, Pisonia
fragrans. Citharexylum spinosum. Bursera simariiba.
Simarouba amara, Brosimum alicaslniin, Poiileria multi-
flora and Fagara martinicensis.

c. Deciduous seasonal forest

Some low-lying areas in the Leeward Islands. St Vincent, the
Grenadines and Grenada, characterised by an annual rainfall
of 1000-1300 mm and a severe dry season, have degraded
examples of what appears lo have been deciduous seasonal
woodland, with a closed upper canopy at 9-12 m and a layer

of shrubs below. Bursera and Pisonia are the only common
trees, usually making up 90 per cent of the stand between them.

d. Dry evergreen forests

Such dry evergreen forests as exist have almost all been very
severely degraded. Larger trees in the surviving remnants
include Pimeuta racenuisa. Coccoloba pubescens. Tabebuia
pallida. Maiiilkani bidcntata. Eugenia spp. and Pisonia
fragrans.

e. Littoral Woodland

Littoral woodland is found widely on the windward shores of
the islands. On the seaward edge it generally consists of a lit-
toral hedge whose height varies from a few centimetres to sev-
eral metres, in which typical species are Coccoloba uvifera,
Chrysobalamts icaco, Conocarpus erectus. Erithalis fruticosa.
Jacquinia barbasco and Plumeria alba. Behind this, and there-
fore partially sheltered from the wind, there may develop
woodland with dominant trees 18-25 m tall not forming a
closed canopy, underneath which is a lower tree stratum and a
shrub layer. Typical components of this woodland are
Tabebuia pallida. Rheedia lateriflora. Calophyllum
antillanum, Pisonia fragrans. Manilkara bidentata, Diospyros
ebenaster, Coccolobis diversifolia, C. pubescens and Pisonia
fragrans. Tenninalia catappa is introduced and naturalized.

f. Swamp Forest

Stands of Pterocarpus officinalis reaching 20 m in height are
found in freshwater swamp areas.

g. Mangrove

Mangroves, generally of low growth, are widely found.
Species are Rhizophora mangle, Avicennia genninans.
Laguncularia racemosa and Conocarpus erectus.

Introduction - Antigua and Barbuda

Antigua and Barbuda comprise three islands: Antigua (280 sq.
km). Barbuda (160 sq. km) 40 km northwards and the tiny,
uninhabited Redonda. In Antigua, dry tlat limestone plains in
the north and east give rise to gently rolling hills in the centre of
the island and to a higher volcanic area in the west. Boggy Peak
at 1319 feet (402 m) is the highest point on Antigua (CCA/IRF,
1991a). Barbuda's topography is lower and more uniform. Most
of this limestone island is only a few feet above sea level.

The islands have high year round temperatures. 29°C in sum-
mer and 24"C in winter. A dry season extends from January to
March or April, with the wettest time occurring from .'August to
November. Annual precipitation in Antigua is 107-1 14 cm.
Barbuda, in contrast, is one of the driest islands in the
Caribbean with only 76-99 cm rain per year.

Most people live on Antigua, where the capital. St John's,
has 36.000 inhabitants. Codrington is the only settlement on
Barbuda: 1500 people or thereabouts live on this island.
Agriculture used to be the mainstay of the country's economy,
with sugar and cotton being important crops, but tourism is now
the primary economic activity.

Forest Resources and Management

Clearing of the forests in Antigua and Barbuda began with the
colonisation of the islands in the early 17th century. In the space
of a few decades, much of the natural vegetation had been cleared
for the cultivation of tobacco, indigo, cotton and then sugar cane

123

Lesser Antilles

(CCA/IRF, 1991a). On Antigua, only 22 sq. km (5500 acres) are
reported to have been spared from cane production (Cater, 1944).
Many reports refer to woodlands, as opposed to forests, on
Antigua and Barbuda (e.g. OAS. 1990). while others state that all
the forest on the islands is .secondary (FAO, 1993b).

Only small areas of humid forest exist on Antigua; the
remaining patches are found in the southwest of the island. It
does not occur on Barbuda (Morello. 1983). In the volcanic
region of Antigua and on the highlands of Barbuda are some
areas of deciduous forest, most of it greatly degraded by collec-
tion of firewood. Barbuda has some .scleromorphic forests of red
cedar Tahehuia pallida, as well as fairly extensive mangrove
edge forests, which are leguminous forests dominated by
Hueinaloxylum and Pitkccellohiiiin. Neither of these formations
are common on Antigua. Both islands have some areas of man-
grove. The most coinmon species are red Rliizophora inani>k'.
white Lagimcularia spp., and black Avicennia spp.

The Caribbean Conservation Association (CCA) report that
the forests on Antigua and Barbuda — including the mangroves
— occupy 15 per cent of the islands' land area (CCA/IRF,
1991a). FAO's (1993a) estimate is that 100 sq. km remain, all in
the moist deciduous forest zone.

Although there have been attempts at reforestation on the
islands, none has been very successful (CCA/IRF. 1991a).

Deforestation

FAO ( 1993a) reports that there is now no deforestation in
Antigua and Barbuda. However, CCA indicate that slash and
burn cultivation, uncontrolled fires and excessive grazing by
livestock destroy much of the secondary forest in an early
stage of its development, leading to soil erosion and general
degradation of the environment. Cutting down trees for fuel

and fenceposts is another source of forest disturbance.

Large scale hotel and related recreational developments
along Antigua's coastline have destroyed considerable areas of
mangrove swamps. In addition, some si/eable areas of man-
grove are used as rubbish dumps, notably Crooks and Filches
Creek on Antigua.

Biodiversity

Nearly three centuries of degradation and land clearing for
intensive agriculture have contributed to loss of species diver-
sity on the islands. In addition the introduction of such species
as fallow deer Daina ilcinia. the Indian mongoose Hi'ipestes
aiiropunclatiis and rats {Ralliis ratliis and R. norvcgicits) have
altered the native biodiversity through competition, habitat
modification and depredation.

There are no comprehensive floral lists for the islands and
the number of indigenous species remaining is unknown.

There are three amphibians on Antigua and one on Barbuda.
Both islands have the small tree frog EU'iilhrodaclyliis joltn-
sfoiiei: while E. inarliniceiisis is also present on Antigua. The
only other amphibian is the introduced toad Biifo maiinus.

Seventeen reptiles have been recorded from Antigua and 12
from Barbuda, these include four marine turtles (Faaborg and
Arendt. 1985). Some of these reptiles are no longer found on the
islands. Threatened species include the endemic snake Alsophis
antiguae and the iguana Iguana delicatissima. The latter has
been decimated by human exploitation and the introduced mon-
goose and may even be extinct (CCA/IRF, 1991a).

There have been 106 bird species reported from Antigua and
74 from Barbuda (Faaborg and Arendt, 1985), Several land
birds have become extinct on the islands. These include an owl,
Spconro ciiniciilaria anuaiira. a parrot Amaz.ona sp. and trem-

C'ctislal WiunlUiiul nl Anligiui.

(Mark Spalding)

124

Lesser Antilles

bier Cinclocerthia ruficaiidata (CCA/IRF. 1991a). The only
species listed as endangered by Collar et at. (1992) is the West
Indian whistling-duck Dcndrocygna arhorea.

The only indigenous mammals remaining on Antigua and
Barbuda are bats, of which there are .seven species.

Conservation Areas

Although there is an institutional framework for a protected
areas system in the form of the National Parks Act of 1984, no
formal system exists. At present, only one protected area —
Nelson's Dockyard National Park on Antigua, is managed.
Those areas in lUCN's categories I-IV are listed in Table 13.3.

Two authorities are involved with the management of pro-
tected areas. These are the National Parks Authority and the
Fisheries Division of the Ministry of Agriculture. Fisheries and
Lands.

Initiatives for Conservation

NGOs on the islands arc particularly knowledgeable and com-
mitted and have been very active despite their lack of resources
(FAO. 1993b).

The first draft of the country's National Forestry Action Plan
was completed in November 1991 and it is expected to be
finalised in 1994. The main emphasis of the Plan is on land use,
conservation and institution building, but none of the proposed
projects has yet been implemented (FAO. 1993b).

Introduction - Dominica

Dominica is one of the larger islands in the Lesser Antilles. It is
volcanic and largely mountainous. The highest peak, Morne
Diablotin, in the north central part of the island, rises to 1447 m
above sea level. The only relatively flat areas are river valleys
on the north-east coast and on the small central plateau.

Rainfall is heaviest from July to January. Annual precipita-
tion ranges from 1250 mm on the northwest coast to 10,000 mm
in the high mountains. Melville Hall on the northeast coast
experiences mean monthly minimum temperatures of 18-20°C
and mean monthly maxima of 28-31 °C.

Dominica was initially settled by Arawak Indians and then
by Caribs. The island is now the major homeland of the last sur-
vivors of the Caribs. Control of the island passed from the
French to the British in 1783; it became independent in 1978.

Population density at 133 people per sq. km is fairly low
compared to most of the other large islands in the Lesser
Antilles. Some 90 per cent of the population live along the
coast, most on the leeward side. The main urban areas are the
capital city of Roseau in the south-west and Portsmouth in the
north-west. About 40 per cent of the people are rural inhabi-
tants, mostly subsistence farmers (CCA/IRF, 1991b).

The economic mainstay of the island is still agriculture, with
crops providing 30 per cent of the gross domestic product in
1988. Bananas and root crops each make up about 30 per cent
of agricultural production. Bananas are the main export fol-
lowed by coconut products, primarily soap. Tourism is a grow-
ing source of income.

Forest Resources and Management

Forests originally covered almost the entire island; as late as
1945 around 80 per cent of Dominica was forested, much of it
secondary although with large expanses of primary forest
(Beard, 1949). The country still has some of the largest expanses
of forest in the Lesser Antilles, with around 520 sq. km of natur-

Table 13.3 Con.servation areas in Antigua and Barbuda

Existing conservation areas in ILICN's categories I-IV are listed.
Marine national parks are not listed or mapped.

National Park
Betty's Hope
Half Moon Bay
Nelson's Dockyard

Other Area

Mamoiira Reef

Park Reserve
Darkwood
Devil's Bridge
Green Island Reefs
Northeast Archipelago

Total

Area sq. km
nd
nd
41

nd
nd
nd
nd

41*

* Noie Ihal for a majority of these areas .sizes iire nol l^nown.
Source: WCMC (unpublished data!

al forest, woodland and hush (CCA/IRF, 1991b), just over half
of which is relatively undisturbed rain forest and lower montane
rain forest (seiisii Beard) or montane forest (Table 13.4).
However, the figures in Table 13.4 are from an OAS map which
must be treated with caution as the aerial photographs on which
it is based are far from perfect (EARTHSTAT, 1986). FAO
(1993a) estimates that there are 440 sq. km of forest on the
island, all in the tropical rain forest zone.

The littoral woodland is confined to a narrow strip along the
windward coast, while the scrub woodland, now all consider-
ably disturbed and degraded, is found on the leeward coast. No
primary stands of semi-evergreen forest remain.

Swamp forests border the river estuaries from Portsmouth to
Marigot. There are only four small areas of mangrove in
Dominica, near Cabrits, in the Canefield Pool, at Calibashie and
at Hampstead. White mangrove Lai^iinciilaria raceinnsa and
black mangrove Aviceiinia germiiiaiis are both present.

A 1986-1987 FAO inventory of the merchantable timber of
the island reported 4.9 million cu. m of timber on 160 sq. km of
land of which, at most, 3.7 million cu. m was considered mar-
ketable (De Milde, 1987; CCA/IRF, 1991b). About 3 million
cu. m of the timber was on government lands. Timber richness
was found to be 200 cu. m per hectare on 125 sq. km and as
high as 600 cu. m per hectare on the remaining 35 sq. km. Three
species, Dacryodes excelsa. Ainunoa carihaea and Tapiini lali-
folia made up 50 per cent of the trees enumerated and these with
a further seven species comprised over 90 per cent of the total
volume (Prins, 1987).

TiiTiber exploitation is carried out by two relatively mecha-
nized companies, Dominica Timbers Limited (DTL) and
Northeastern Timber Cooperative Ltd (NET), as well as around
100 pitsawyers. Annual output from the two companies is about
4 million board-feet (ca 9500 cu. m), while that from the pit-
sawyers is between one and two million board-feet (ca
2400-4800 cu. m) (CCA/IRF, 1 99 lb). Combined, this provides
about 75 per cent of the timber used locally for furniture and
house construction.

On all state lands there is a minimum girth limit, between
one and two metres, before a tree may be harvested. NET was
recently allowed to cut a 8 ha area of the Northern Forest

125

Lesser Antilles

Table 13.4 Areas of the different forest types remaining on
Dominica

Per ct'iir of land

4.6

1.0

0.3

0.2

7.9
11.5

9.1

0.1

rest Type

Area (sq. kin)

Mature inc. lower montane

244.9

Montane

36.4

Montane thicket

Elfin woodland

Littoral woodland

1.4

Scrub woodland

62.4

Secondary rain forest

90.9

Semi-evergreen forest

71.7

Swamp

0.3

Total

517.7

65.6

NB The land area used lo ealculale the figures in column 3 appears lo be 790 sq. km.
Simm- EARTHST.^T I I9S5)

Reserve and here it was stipulated that reforestation had to be
undertaken. This has occurred in about half the area cut. using
e.xotics, mostly mahogany.

The Forestry and Wildlife Division within the Ministry of
Agriculture and the Environment is responsible for the protec-
tion and management of forests, wildlife and watersheds as well
as for the national parks and for environmental education.

Deforestation

A 1987 study concluded that at that time some 237 sq. km or 46
per cent of the island had been deforested. Much of the clearing
has occurred since 1945 (Figure 13.2). FAO (1993a) estimates
that 3 sq. km of forest are cleared annually, a rate of OJ per cent.
The main motivation is land clearance for agriculture, particularly
for banana plantations. Forested state land is still being sold into
private ownership, often to small farmers, without consultation
with the Forest Department: these areas, including steep slopes
and watersheds, are being deforested, usually for cultivation of
bananas and other crops. Many of the trees cut are allowed to rot
where they fall rather than being used more productively. Cutting
wood for charcoal is also still extensively practised.

Biodiversity

Dominica has at least 1000 species of native flowering plants
(CCA/IRF. 1991b) of which twelve are endemic (WCMC.
1992).

There are two native amphibian species, Eteiitherodactyhis
martinicensis and Leplodactyhis fallax (Corke. 1992). Twelve
of the 14 reptiles on the island are native, of which two iAnolis

Table 13.5 Conservation areas in Dominica

Existing conservation areas in lUCN"s categories 1-lV are listed

National Park

Mome Trois Pitons
Cabrits

Wildlife Reser\'e
Dyer Estate

Natural Monument
Indian River

Total

Source: WCMC lunpubhshed data)

Area (sq. km)

ocidatiis and Aineiva fiiscata) are endemic (Corke. 1992). how-
ever neither of these lives in moist forests. Iguana delicatissima,
the Lesser Antiguan iguana, which is listed as vulnerable by
lUCN (Groombridge. 1993) occurs on the island.

There have been 166 species of birds recorded on Dominica,
of which 59 species breed there (Johnson. 1988). Species diver-
sity is highest in the lowland and montane rain forest (Evans,
1986). There are two single-island endemics, the red-necked
amazon Ainazona arausiaca and the imperial amazon A. imperi-
alis; both are threatened, are dependent on rain forest and are
now concentrated on Morne Diablotin (Collar et al.. 1992).
Nine other species are restricted to the Lesser Antilles
(Johnson. 1988).

The only native maniinals are bats. With 12 species
Dominica has the highest bat diversity in the Lesser Antilles.
One species Myolis dominicensis is endemic to the island and
three are restricted to the Antilles: Monophyllus plethodon,
Ardops nichollsi and Brachyphylla cavernarum. There are six
introduced mammals, including the agouti Dasyprocta aiitilleii-
sis which was probably brought in by the Arawak Indians.

Conservation Areas

Legally established conservation areas cover 171 sq. km or
about 23 per cent of Dominica, but only four of these areas are
in lUCN's categories I-IV (Table 13.5). The largest is the
Northern Forest Reserve (category VIll) at 88 sq km — all oth-
ers, except Morne Trois Piton. are 5 sq. km or less. A ten year
management plan has been drafted for Morne Trois Pitons
National Park by Scheele (1989). Morne Diablotin has been
proposed as a site for a new national park of about 25 sq. km.

The degree of protection of Dominica's forests is not clear.
There is. for instance, a proposal to put a principal highway
through the east side of the Northern Forest Reserve. There is
also a hydropower scheme being developed in Morne Trois
Pitons National Park which includes transformation of one of the
main attractions of the area — Freshwater Lake — into a reser-
voir. In addition, squatters are tolerated in this park, because of
the country's need for agricultural land (CCA/IRF. 1991b).

Initiatives for Conservation

An environmental monitoring programme, the DomLnica
Multiple Land Use Project, has been in progress for ten years.
This study has two main objectives: an assessment of the impact
of different forms of land use on the flora and fauna of the
island and a study of how best to improve the economy by
developing particular forms of agriculture, forestry, industry
and tourism without conflicting with conservation interests
(Evans, 1986).

Non-governmental organisations include the Dominica
Conservation Association. This society is working on a devel-
opment plan for the country. It has received funding from the
Caribbean Conservation Association and the MacArthur
Foundation. The Caribbean Natural Resources Institute has
sponsored a cottage forest industries programme, organising
sawyers and serving as a timber marketing outlet.

Introduction - Grenada

The State of Grenada includes the large island of Grenada and
the much smaller islands of Carriacou and Petit Martinique in
the Grenadines, as well as a number of tiny islands off the main
ones. Only the island of Grenada is discussed here as the others
have no rain forest on them.

126

Lesser Antilles

PRE ARAWAK

MONTANE & ELFIN

I iAIN

FOREST

LITTORAL WOODLAND ••. DRY SCRUB WOODLAND

CULTIVATED

Figure 13.2 Vegetation cover in Dominica in Pre-Arawak times. 1945 and 1985.

■ Evans I 19861

Grenada i.s dominated by mountain peaks, steep ridges and
deep, narrow valleys. The island's principal peak. Mount St
Catherine (833 m). is located in the northern half of the ridge
that runs north-south through the centre of the island. The
slopes are comparatively gentle in the east where there are some
fairly extensive coastal plains. The western side is more rugged.
There are low hills in the north-east and south-west.

June to December is the wetter season, with some risk of hur-
ricanes. On the coast rainfall is about 1500 mm. in the moun-
tains it may reach 5000 mm. Average annual temperature at sea
level is about 30°C (CCA/IRF. 1991c).

The Carib Indians living on the island at the time of French
occupation in 1650 were more or less completely exterminated
by 1654. The island was taken over by the British in 1762. won
back by the French in 1779. returned to Britain in 1783 and then
became an independent nation within the Commonwealth in
1974. The population is mostly of African origin, descendants
of the slaves brought in to tend the sugar cane. There are six
major settlements located in the coastal area of the island, the
largest is the capital. St George's. Average population density is
294 people per sq. km.

In the early eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, sugar cane
was the main crop on the island. Agriculture is still the single
most important sector of Grenada's economy. Nowadays, the
principal export crops are cocoa, bananas, nutmeg and mace.

Forest Resources and Management

Figure 13.3 shows the distribution of the vegetation on Grenada

as indicated by Beard in 1949. The most recent map of actual
vegetation cover was compiled from interpretation of aerial pho-
tographs taken in 1982 (Eschweiler, 1982). At that time there
were 17 sq. km of "montane rain forest" (this includes Beard's
(1949) categories of montane thicket, elfin woodland and palm
brake) and 23 sq. km of "closed evergreen rain forest" (including
Beard's primary and secondary rain forest and lower montane
forest). There was also 18 sq. km of "moist deciduous and semi-
deciduous forest". 28 sq. km of ruinate cropland and grazing
land reverting to secondary growth and 2 sq. km of mangrove.
Eschweiler estimated that as little as a quarter ( 10 sq. km) of the
40 sq. km of rain forest on Grenada was relatively undisturbed.
The remaining forests are all in steep inaccessible areas. The
montane thicket is found on the summit of the main watersheds
from Mount Qua Qua south towards Mount Sinai and on lesser
ridges in the area, while the evergreen and semi-evergreen forest
is found in a small patch on Mome Delice. Mangroves occurred
mainly at Levera Pond in the northeast and also at the head of
deep inlets along the south coast. FAO (1993a) reports the same
area (60 sq. km) of forest remaining on the island, though all of
it is considered to be in the moist deciduous zone.

About 48 sq. km of nominally "forested" land belongs to the
Government (CCA/IRF. 1991c); 32.6 sq km of this is Crown
land and 15.4 sq. km is Grand Etang Forest Reserve.

There has been little forestry on the island except in the
Grand Etang Forest Reserve. Much of the timber in this reserve
was severely damaged by Hurricane Janet in 1955. A few small
government plantations of. principally, blue mahoe Hibiscus

127

Lesser Antilles

GRENADA

2 3

Scule of miles
Suvanna & Grazing Land

R3^yy Dr> Scrub- Woodlands Victoria,

Rjin Forcsi

j Mi>nianc Thickci

Y////X P..ln. Brake Ooi^yav.
|*tVtVt| Ellin W.»iJl..nd

Secondary Forcsl

Figure 13.3 The vegetation of Grenada as indicated by Beard

in 1949. 5nH«f.CCA/IRF(l991c)hasedon Beard(l949l

Biodiversity

Beard (1949) recorded 120 tree species, of which 15 were
Lesser Antillean endemics. One rain forest tree. Maylenus
f>ienai:len.si.s. is endemic to the island.

Grenada has three native amphibian species,
Eleiitherodactylus johnstonei, E. urichi and Leptodactylus wag-
iieri. the last two of which are found in the Grand Etang forests
(Corke, 1992). In addition, the cane toad Bitfo inarinus has been
introduced, originally to control pests in sugar-cane fields.

There were 15 terrestrial reptile species on the island, but two
snakes [Liophis ineUiiiotiis and Pseiiclohoa neiiwiecli) are
believed extirpated (Corke. 1992). There is one endemic, a
worm snake Txphlops tlontinii luui. Three other species, the
lizards Anolis aeneus and A. richardi and the snake
Mastigodiyas hruesi are regional endemics (Corke, 1992) and
there are two introduced species (a tortoise and a gecko).

About 150 species of birds have been recorded in Grenada
(Groomc, 1970) but only 35 of these are resident species of land
bird (Blockstein, 1988). The only species listed as threatened by
Collar et al. (1992) is the endemic Grenada dove Leptotila
wellsi. of which only 100 or so remain. It is threatened princi-
pally by habitat destruction. It is not, however, an inhabitant of
the rain forest, but is found in lowland dry-scrub woodland.

The only native mammals in Grenada are its eleven species
of bat; none is endemic and little information exists on their sta-
tus. Introduced mammals on the island include the greater and
lesser Chapman's murine opossums — Mannosa robinsoiii
chapmani and M. fitscata carri respectively — and the nine-
banded armadillo Dasypus novemcinctus (CCA/IRF, 1991c).
Several other species have been introduced more recently,
including the mona monkey Cercopitheciis mono and the mon-
goose Herpestes aiiropunitatus. both of which are considered
serious pests.

etatus exist, covering a total of 165 ha (CCA/IRF. 1991c). Two
nurseries are operated by the Forestry department for the pro-
duction of timber and Christmas tree seedlings.

Most roundwood is imported, primarily for the construction
industry. There are four local sawmills but at least up to 1986
none had secondary processing equipment, there was no drying
kiln on the island and only one saw capable of processing logs
from old-growth forests of mature plantations (CCA/IRF,
1991c).

Deforestation

The early European colonists cleared most of the low altitude
forest to plant sugar, along with some indigo and cotton. Later
many of the higher areas were also cleared for cash crops or
shifting agriculture.

The forests have also been degraded for many centuries by
extensive collecting of wood for fuel. Large quantities were
needed to fuel the sugar factory boiling houses and rum distil-
leries. Charcoal is traditionally the primary cooking fuel in
Grenada and the demand for this and firewood still contributes
to the overall exploitation of the forest. There is, however, no
reliable information on the use of these fuels or the extent of
their contribution to deforestation.

According to FAO ( 1993a), Grenada is one of the two coun-
tries in the Americas where the area of forest is increasing
rather than decreasing — the other is Puerto Rico. It is reported
that the island is gaining 2 sq. km of forest each year, an annual
increase of 4.3 per cent.

Conservation Areas

There are, at present, no officially designated national parks in
Grenada. A plan for a nationwide system of national parks and
protected areas has been prepared (GOG/OAS. 1988). but has not
yet been officially accepted by the government. There is one 15.5
sq. km forest reserve in the country. Grand Etang, which was
established in 1906 and enlarged in 1963 (CCA/IRF, 1991cl.
However, logging can occur in the reserve and although hunting
and trapping are prohibited there is little protection of the area.

Initiatives for Conservation

There is a National Trust and Historical Society in Grenada
which is concerned with the island's flora and fauna as well as
its historical and cultural heritage.

Introduction - Guadeloupe

The two large islands of Basse-Terre and Grand-Terre, separat-
ed by the Riviere Salee, make up most of Guadeloupe. A few,
smaller islands (Marie Galante. la Desirade and Saintes archi-
pelago) are also associated. The islands of Saint Barthelemy and
Saint Martin, situated about 200 km north, are part of the same
administrative unit.

Grande-Terre. a flat limestone island, has no forest and virtual-
ly no natural vegetation remaining on it. Basse-Terre is volcanic
and mountainous, rising to 1467 m at La Soufriere volcano, the
highest peak in the Lesser Antilles. Most land below 400 m on this
island has been developed but there is still untouched rain forest
and lower montane forest at higher altitudes (Davis et al.. 1986).

128

Lesser Antilles

The climate on Guadeloupe is warm and humid. In the town
of Basse-Terre, mean monthly maximum temperatures vary from
24.4°C in February to 27.7°C in August. Average annual rainfall
is 1814 mm and the wettest months are from June to September.

A French colony was established on Guadeloupe in 16,^5 and
the country has remained a French possession. It is an overseas
department and an administrative region of France. About half
the population live in urban area.s, with concentrations at Ihe
main port of Pointe-a-Pitre and its suburb of Les Abymes. as
well as in the capital town of Basse-Terre.

Bananas, sugar and rum are the main agricultural exports.
However, tourism, not agriculture, is the main economic
activity of Guadeloupe.

Forest Resources and Management

I'AO ( 1993a) estimates that there is as much as 930 sq. km of
forest in Guadeloupe, all in the tropical rain forest zone. The
Office National des Forets, in contrast, reports only 650 sq.
km of forest on the island (ONF, 1990). Of these, 388 sq.
km, comprising 280 sq. km of "foret departementalo-doma-
niale", 15 sq. km of littoral "foret domaniale", 13 sq. km of
departmental forest and 80 sq. km of mangrove, are con-
trolled by ONF. The remaining 262 sq. km of forest is either
in private hands or is public forest not managed by the ONF.
The mangrove area is the largest in the Lesser Antilles
(Putney, 1982). The main area is around Grand Cul de Sac
Marin. There are also swamp forests in the north of Basse-
Terre. Figure 13.4 maps the vegetation on Guadeloupe as
shown on a Centre d" Etude de Geographic Tropicale map
published in 1980.

Under a management plan which ran from 30 May 1979 to
31 December 1990. 150 sq. km of the foret departementalo-
domaniale at higher altitudes was designated a protected zone
where no silviculture was to be undertaken. A further 80 sq. km
was designated a production area for mahogany and 50 sq. km
was designated a production area for local timbers.

A proposed management plan to follow on from this desig-
nated 10 sq. km to be planted with mahogany, 10-15 sq. km to
be reafforested with a mixture of mahogany and local tree
species, 5 sq. km to be reafforested with local tree species fol-
lowing the effects of Hurricane Hugo and 5 sq. km to be
allowed to regenerate naturally.

Deforestation

Forests on Guadeloupe were seriously affected by Hurricane
Hugo in September 1989. There is little information on the
causes of deforestation on the island but FAO ( 1993a) estimates
that 3 sq. km are lost each year, an annual rate of 0.3 per cent.

Biodiversity

Ten bat species are found on Guadeloupe, two of them
(Eptesicus guadeloupensis and Sturnira thomasi) restricted to
the island (Honacki et at., 1982). The racoon Procyon minor
may be an endemic species on Guadeloupe, but it may be con-
specific with the North American P. lotor (Honacki et al..
1982): it is almost certainly a human introduction.

There is one endemic bird, the Guadeloupe woodpecker
Melanerpes henninieri. It is most commonly found in areas of
moist forest on Basse-Terre (Short, 1974).

The numbers of reptiles and amphibians on the island is
unknown. Two reptiles, excluding the marine turtles, are listed
as threatened. These are Iguana deliiulissinni and the snake
Alsophis rijcrsnuii (Groombridge, 1993).

Table 13.6 Conservation areas in Guadeloupe

Existing conservation areas in lUCN's categories 1-IV are listed. For
informalion on Biosphere Reserves and Ranisar Sites, see Chapter S.

Naliiiiial Park

Area (sq. hn)

Guadeloupe

173

Nature Resen-c

Grand Cul de Sac Marin

Total

210

Conservation Areas

There is one national park and one nature reserve (Table 13.6).
Management of reserves is the responsibility of the Pare
National de Guadeloupe under the control of the Ministry of the
Environment. The national park, which is mostly forested, is co-
managed by ONF. Several new sites are proposed.

Introduction - Martinique

Martinique is the second largest island in the Lesser Antilles. It
is mountainous, particularly in the northern half. The highest
peak, Mt Pelee (1397 m), is an active volcano in the far north.
Other major massifs are Morne Jacob and Carbet.

There is a well defined dry season from November to March.
Average annual rainfall on high ground in the north is ca 7500
mm. The south is much drier, with ca 500 mm annual rainfall.
The island is within the hurricane belt.

Martinique was already inhabited by Caribs when discovered
by Columbus in 1493. A French colony was first established in
1635. Since then, apart from intermittent periods under English
control, it has been governed by France of which it became an
Overseas Department in 1946.

Population density is high (around 400 people per sq. km);
over 30 per cent are concentrated in three adjacent urban areas
in the western-central part of the island — Fort-de-France (the
capital), Schoelcher and Lamentin. As many as 81 per cent of
the population are urban dwellers. Of the economically active
population, numbering ca 130.000 in 1989, only 10 per cent are
involved in agriculture.

Principal exports are agricultural products (bananas, rum and
sugar) and petroleum products, synthesised from imported crude
petroleum. In 1988, 83 sq. km of land were under banana culti-
vation, and 34.6 sq. km under sugar-cane.

Forest Resources and Management

Forest of some description reportedly covers approximately 44
per cent of the island (D. Chalmers, in litt). There are said to be
some areas of virtually pristine rainforest in the remote moun-
tain district of Plateau de la Concorde at about 600 m (D.
Chalmers, in litt.). Elsewhere, forests at lower elevations are
secondary with some montane thicket, palm brake and elfin
woodland at higher elevations (Davis ('/ al.. 1986). Some of the
forests in the south are privately owned. FAO (1993a; reports
that there is 430 sq. km of forest on Martinique.

The second largest mangrove area in the Lesser Antilles,
covering 22 sq. km, is found in Fort-de-France Bay. There are
also reportedly almost pristine well-developed mangrove areas
in the south-east.

Martinique's forest policy emphasises three roles for the for-
est: production, conservation and recreation. Commercial

129

Lesser Antilles

618

61.7

61.6

61.5

61.4

61.3

61.1

16.5

16.4

16.3

16.2

- 16 1

- 15.9

15.8

61.8

61.7

^ <*

61.6

Les Saintes

61.5

61.4

Marie-Galante

61.3

60.9
16.5

La Desiiade 16.3

162 -

lies de la Petite Terre

■

Mangrove

Swainp forest

■

Dry foiest

Lowland moist

forest

Montane forest

■

Montane thicket

Non forest

5 10

15 20 km

16 -

5.9

5.8

61.2

60.9

Figure 13.4 The vegetation on Guadeloupe as shown on a Centre d' Etude de Geographie Tropicale map published in 1980.

Source: Centre d'Etude de Geographie Tropicale (1980)

exploitation is limited in scale and restricted to around 12 species.
Production was quoted in 1983 as around 6000 cu. m, compared
with imports of 40.000 cu. m. Plantations of mahogany Swietenia
have been established since 1960. There is active charcoal pro-
duction, mainly in the private forests in the south.

In 1960 the role of the Office Nationale des Forets (ONF —
the National Forest Office), which had until then been purely
protection of national and public forests, was expanded to cover
the accommodation of leisure activities within forest areas. In
1981 their role was further extended to include the management
of all littoral forest, including mangrove and any forest
associated with the 1 20 beaches fringing the island. To meet the
increasing demand for leisure activities there are now 350 km of
forest roads and trails of which 170 kni are maintained by the
forest service.

Deforestation

One of the major problems on the island is the pressure exerted
on the fragile littoral forest by the large number of campers
using sites near the beaches. The annual rate of deforestation is
estimated to be 0.5 per cent, or 2 sq. km per year (FAO, 1993a).

Biodiversity

Martinique has 24 recorded endemic plant species. Several tree
species are considered in need of monitoring, including the
endemics Didymopanax urbanianum (syn. Schefflera
urbaniana) (Araliaceae), found at ca 800 m, Sloanea dussii
(Elaeocarpaceae) and Drypetes dussii (Fiard. 1992; D.
Chalmers. //; litt). The endemic dwarf shrub Tiboiichina
ciiamaecistus which occurs at high altitude is classified as
Vulnerable because of picking of flowers and uprooting.
Avicennia schauerana and Pterocarpus officinalis are also of
note (D. Chalmers, in litt).

Five single-island endemic reptiles have been recorded; two
of these (Ameivci major and Leiocephalus herminieri) are
believed extinct, while a third. Liophis cursor, was last seen in
the 1960s. The other two endemic species are Aiiolis roquet and
Bothrops lanceolcitus. The threatened Iguana delicatissima is
found on the island. One regionally endemic amphibian,
Eleutherodactylus martinicensis, occurs.

The one recorded native terrestrial mammal, the endemic
Martinique rice rat Megalomys desmarestii. is extinct. Nine chi-
ropterans have been recorded. Introduced mammals include the

130

Lesser Antilles

agouti Dasyprocta aguti and mongoose Herpestes auropunctatiis.
Some 53 breeding birds have been recorded of which one,
the Martinique oriole Icterus bonana. is endemic; it is classified
as endangered by Collar et at. (1992), its decline being chiefly
attributable to brood-parasitism by the shiny cowbird Mohnhriis
bonariensis. The oriole inhabits all the island's forest types
except cloud-forest. Eight other species confined to the Lesser
Antilles occur, including the endangered white-breasted
thrasher Ramphocinclus brachyunis, which is found in dry for-
est on Martinique and St Lucia only.

Conservation Areas

Since 1976, 70 per cent of Martinique has been classified as a
Regional Nature Park which has an lUCN category of V; within
the park, areas are zoned to safeguard different land uses,
although it is unclear how effective or comprehensive protection
is. There is a 4 sq. km nature reserve on the Caravelle Peninsula
on the east coast, also established in 1976; it is not known how
much of this is forested. Other conservation areas within lUCN
category I-IV are listed in Table 1.3.7. Both the nature park and
nature reserve are administered by a board composed of repre-
sentatives of the municipalities, the region and the department.
The administration is separate from the ONF.

Conservation Initiatives

An arboretum with over 60 indigenous tree species has been
established at La Donis, close to a popular forest recreation
area. Two botanical trails have been created, one in mesophytic
forest in the north and the other in .\erophytic forests at Grand
Macabou.

Introduction - St Kitts and Nevis

The main part of St Kitts has a rugged backbone dominated by
the Northwest Range and including the Central and Southeast
Ranges. There are three linked volcanoes in the Northwest
Range, the highest, Mt Liamuiga, reaching 1 156 m. The steeper
part of the mountainous interior of St Kitts is surrounded by an
upland forest belt which grades into a gradually sloping coastal
plain. This plain is covered primarily by sugar cane with
expanding patches of diversified agricultural crops and some
pasture land.

Nevis is approximately circular and is dominated by the 985 m
high Nevis Peak which forms the central part of a north-south
spine completed by Windy Hill in the north and Saddle Hill in
the south.

The climate of both islands is tropical and heavily influenced
by steady northeast trade winds. Mean annual temperature is
about 27°C. Annual precipitation is 1625 mm on St Kitts and
I 170 mm on Nevis.

The Carib Indians remained on St Kitts until the early 17th
century. A small number of British established a settlement
there in 1624 and were followed soon after by the French.
Within a few years all the resident Caribs had been killed or
enslaved. Nevis was settled by a group of Englishmen in 1628.
France ceded St Kitts to the British in the early 18th century.
The federation of St Kitts and Nevis became an independent
nation in 1983. Most of its population are descendants ot the
slaves brought in to work in the sugar cane fields. The chief
town on St Kitts is the capital, Basseterre; on Nevis the major
town is Charlestown. About half of the population are urban
dwellers.

On St Kitts the main economic activity was sugar production.

Table 13.7 Conservation areas in Martinique

Existing conservation areas in lUCN's cateaories I-IV are listed.

Bird Reserve

llets de Ste Anne

Lilloral Consenation Area
Caravelle
Precheur/Gd Riviere

Nature ReseiTe
Caravelle

Total

Source: WCMC (unpublished data)

Area (sq. km)
<0.l

2.5
5

11.5

now tourism is gradually replacing agriculture as the major eco-
nomic sector. Agriculture (fruit and vegetables), fisheries and
tourism are important on Nevis.

Forest Resources and Management

The present vegetation of St Kitts and Nevis is greatly dis-
turbed by human activities. In most lowland areas all traces of
natural vegetation have been removed. Although the mountain
peaks are covered in forest, it is unlikely that this is virgin.
Storms undoubtedly have an impact on the forest and maintain
much of it in a pre-climax condition (CCA/IRF, I991d).
Vegetation cover as recorded by Beard in 1949 is shown on
Figure 13.5.

There is an estimated 65 sq. km of woodland/forest on St
Kitts, of which 23 sq. km is cloud and rainforest, 21 sq. km
moist forest and the remaining 21 sq. km dry forest (Mills,
1988). Forest on Nevis covers an estimated 19 sq. km. The
upland forested areas on both St Kitts and Nevis appear to be
increasing in extent as abandoned agricultural land reverts to
secondary forest. FAO (1993a) estimate a total cover of 130 sq.
km, all in the moist deciduous zone.

Traditionally, the management of forested areas on St Kitts
was undertaken by the sugar estate owners. Although initially
conserving the forests, they began to cut them down to increase
the area of sugar cane. As a result, in 1904 a Forest Ordinance
established a Forestry Board to control the cutting. This was
never very effective and in 1987 a National Conservation and
Environmental Protection Act was passed. This covers numer-
ous aspects of conservation including the establishment and
administration of protected areas, protection of forests, soil and
water conservation, reforestation, control of charcoal production
and control of logging. At present forestry falls under the
Director of Agriculture.

The Forest Ordinance of 1904 declared all forested lands on
both St Kitts and Nevis above 1000 feet (330 m) in elevation as
crown lands and even now nearly all forested areas, except the
dry forest on the Southeast Peninsula of St Kitts, are owned by
the government.

The only substantial stand of tall forest on Nevis is on the
northwestern side of the mountain above Jessups (Davis et at.
1986). Palm brake is found on Nevis' s mountain slopes above
550 m on the eastern and southern slopes and above 700 m on
the northern and western slopes (CCA/IRF, 199 Id). Elfin wood-
land is on the summits of the mountains. Good stands of white
mangrove Laguncularia racemosa still exist on Nevis at

131

Lesser Antilles

Newcastle Bay. Pinneys Estate and the mouth of the Bath
Stream (Rodrigues, 1990).

There is no forest management or protection programme on
Nevis and the island has no active forestry unit despite propos-
als for forest management having been prepared by the
Caribbean Development Board as long ago as 1983.

Deforestation

Most of Nevis below 600 m has been cultivated since the late
1600s and as early as 1687 it was reported by Sloane ( 1707) that
"the clearing of land extended almost to the top of the central
mountain". The area under cultivation (for sugar and subse-
quently mainly for cotton) has declined dramatically on Nevis
during this century, resulting in large areas of fallow land.
Figures for the rate of deforestation in St Kitts and Nevis in the
recent FAO publication (FAO, 1993a) are not consistent. In
Table 4c of this report, deforestation is given as nil, but the
annual rate of deforestation is 0.2 per cent. In Table 8c, area
deforested is zero, but it is reported that 100 per cent of the
deforestation occurs in the moist deciduous zone.

Charcoal was reported in the 1940s to be the principal forest
product, much of it produced in Nevis resulting in the destruc-
tion of large areas of forest on the leeward side of the island. A
1980 household census revealed that just under 30% of house-
holds used wood and/or charcoal for cooking. Residential
encroachment is a threat to the higher elevation forest in Nevis

(CCA/IRF. 1991d). Uncontrolled grazing reportedly hampers
any forest regeneration ( D. Chalmers, in lilt. ).

One of the major mangrove locations on St Kilts, Great
Heeds Pond, which is also an important habitat for wildlife, par-
ticularly migratory birds, is under stress from solid waste dump-
ing and other industrial activities.

Biodiversity

Beard (1949) reported 121 tree species on St Kitts and Nevis.
The islands have two endemic plant species (WCMC. 1992).

St Kitts and Nevis has five lizards, four geckos and two
snakes (CCA/IRF, 1 99 Id). lUCN (Groombridge, 1993) lists two
of these as threatened — these are Iguana delicatissima and
Alsophis rufivenlris. There are two native amphibians,
Eleutherodactylus johnstonei and Leplodactylus fallax, although
the latter may be extinct on the islands, and the cane toad has
been introduced.

There are at least 35 resident breeding bird species on St
Kitts; Morris and Lemon ( 1982) recorded 77 bird species during
a survey in 1982. A minimum of 70 species of birds has been
sighted on Nevis (Hilder, 1989). The only globally threatened
bird listed as occurring on the islands by Collar et al. ( 1992) is
the West Indian whistling duck Dendrocygna arboiea. It
appears likely that this marsh-dwelling duck no longer occurs
there.

The only native mammals on St Kitts and Nevis are bats. At

Figure 13.5 The vegetation of St Kitts and Nevis as recorded by Beard in 1949.

Source.- Beard (1949)

ST. KITTS AND NEVIS

Scale ot Miles

Savanna & Grazing Land
^^^^^^ tJry Scrub-Woodlands
(MMH Ram Forest

\y//X\ P^'ni Brake
|V,',*,'| Ellin Woodland
[i niMi I Secondary Forest

CHABLESTOWN

132

Lesser Antilles

least seven species occur on St Kitts including tlie regional
endemics Ardops nichoUsi, Brtuhyphyllum cavcrnariiin and
Monophylhis plethodon. Two species have been identified on
Nevis. Artiheus jciinaicensis and Molossiis molossiis. Introduced
species on St Kitts and Nevis are the vervet monkey
Cercopithecus aelhiops and the mongoose Herpestes auropunc-
tatus as well as rats and mice. There is a small feral herd of
white-tailed deer Odocoileiis v!i\i>iinciniis on St Kitts.

Conservation Areas

The only protected areas on St Kitts are the small Brimstone
Hill Fortress National Park, which is a historical monument, and
the Southeast Peninsula (Table 13.8). Neither plays any part in
conserving moist forest. There are no protected areas on Nevis.
The recent National Conservation and Environmental Protection
Act provides for the establishment of other conservation areas.
A total of fourteen or so sites on both islands have been pro-
posed for protection.

Conservation Initiatives

A recent OAS Natural Resource Management Planning Project
for St Kitts was concerned with the identification, propagation
and outplanting of suitable forest species in multi-purpose plan-
tations (CCA/IRF. 1 99 Id).

The 1987 National Conservation and Environmental
Protection Act allows for greater involvement by NGOs in the
management of some protected areas. It is hoped that this will
allow for improved public awareness and education.

Introduction - St Lucia

The island of St Lucia is volcanic with an irregular, steep terrain
and very little flat land. About 90 per cent of the island has a
slope greater than 1:10. The south-central mountain cluster rises
to 950 m at Mt Gimie.

Mean annual temperature is 27°C with little seasonal varia-
tion. January to May are the drier months, hurricanes may occur
from late June to early October and there are often severe tropi-
cal storms in November. Rainfall is uneven over the island,
ranging from about 1500 mm annually in the extreme north and
south to around 3700 mm at Quiless and Edmond in the moun-
tainous south-central area.

Most of the population lives on or near the coast and is con-
centrated in the north-west. Urban centres are located on river
mouths on the generally flatter coastal plain. Over 90 per cent of
landholdings are 4 ha or less in size and these produce about 60
per cent of the country's agricultural produce. Agricultural out-
put accounted for 17 per cent of GDP in 1986. with bananas
being the dominant cash crop (CCA/IRF, 1991e). Tourism is
becoming increasingly important in the island.

St Lucia was first occupied by Amerindians, the Ciboneys,
about 2500 years ago. The Arawaks became established about

Table 13.8 Conservation areas in St Kitts and Nevis

E,xisting conservation areas in lUCN's categories l-IV are listed.

Ntiliimal Ftirk

Brimstone Hill Fortress

Southeast Peninsula and Recreation Area

Total

Area Isq. km)

0.2
26

26.2

200 AD. but by the I 3th century were displaced by the Carib
Indians. It was 1663 before the Caribs were e.xpelled and the
island then changed hands 14 times before finally being ceded
to Britain in 1814.

Forest Resources and Management

The forests are now mostly confined to the more inaccessible
mountainous areas in the interior of St Lucia. Figure 13.6 illus-
trates the vegetation cover on St Lucia as mapped by the
Organisation of the American States (OAS) in 1984. In March
1988. CIDA estimated that approximately 77 sq. km (13 per
cent) of the island was occupied by primary forest. Rain forest
covered around 68 sq. km, while the rest was montane thicket,
elfin woodland or other small climax forest associations.
Around 60 per cent of the forest is on slopes of between 20° and
30°, with another 9 per cent on slopes over 30° (Piitz, 1983).
Montane thicket is found principally at La Sociere, Piton Flore,
Morne Locombe. Piton St Esprit and Grand Magazin. The only
remaining area of elfin woodland, or cloud forest, of any size is
on Mt Gimie (CCA/IRF, I991e). FAO (1993a) reports only 50
sq. km of forest remaining.

There are very small patches of mangrove scattered mainly
round the east and northwest coasts, few of which are still intact
(CCA/IRF, 1991e). Approximately 2 sq. km are thought to exist
of which those at Savannes Bay and Praslin are least degraded
(CCA/IRF. I991e). The largest area is at Man Kote but here, in
particular, overharvesting of the mangroves for charcoal is a
problem.

Lowland and lower montane forests account for nearly all the
commercial timber land. Half of the merchantable timber vol-
ume is collected from six species within these forests: gommier
Dacryodes e.xcelsa. chataignier Sloanea sp., balata chien
Oxytheca pallida, bois de masse Licania ternatensis, bois pain
marron Talauma dodecapetala and mahaut cochon Sterciilia
caribaea. Forest reserves cover 75 sq. km of land. Exploited
forests cover 16 sq. km of Protection Production Forest, of
which 14 sq. km are in forest reserves, and 6.7 sq. km of
Exploitation Forest on private land. It is estimated that the sus-
tainable timber production from natural forests on the island is
only 1 200 cu m per year ( FAO. 1 99 1 ).

Plantations on the island are mostly small and cover only
3 sq. km or thereabouts. The most commonly used species are
mahogany Swietenia macrophylla, blue mahoe Hibiscus elatiis
and Caribbean pine Finns caribaea.

Deforestation

There is little information available on the rate of deforestation
in St Lucia. FAO (1993a) estimates an annual loss of 3 sq. km
between 1981 and 1990. which gives the very high rate of 5.2
per cent per year. In 1980, Hurricane Allen damaged an
estimated 40 per cent of trees in 80 per cent of the island's
forests. Increasing population pressure and a rising demand for
agricultural land are the main causes of forest clearing, and
these have been exacerbated by the development of roads into
formerly inaccessible forests (CCA/IRF, I991e). These roads
have enabled quite large tracts of forest to be illicitly removed
for banana cultivation.

Firewood and charcoal are important fuels on the island; they
are used by over 80 per cent of households, and the demand for
these contributes to the exploitation of the forests.

Biodiversity

The number of plant species on St Lucia is unknown, but Beard

133

Lesser Antilles

Saint Vincent Channel

Figure 13.6 The vegetation on St Lucia as mapped by the
Organisation of the American States (OAS) in 1984.

threatened, the latter may even be extinct, probably exterminated
by the introduced mongoose. The other endangered bird on the
island is the white-breasted thrasher Riimphi>cinctiis
brachyurus, which is found in semi-arid woodland on St Lucia
and also on Martinique.

There are 17 species of reptile on the island, excluding
marine turtles, five of these are endemic and three are intro-
duced (Corke. 1992). The endemics are three lizards (Anolis
liiciae. Cnemiclophonis vanzoi and Sphaerodactxius
microtepis). and two snakes (Bothrops caribhaeus and Liophis
onumis). C. vanzoi and L. ornatus are found only on the Maria
Islands; they are listed as vulnerable and endangered
respectively by lUCN (Groombridge, 1993).

There are two native amphibians, Eleutherodactylus john-
slonei and Ololygon rubra, neither of which is endemic. The
former is reportedly abundant, the latter apparently not. The
introduced Bufa imiriniis is also common (Corke, 1992).

Conservation Areas

Excluding the Forest Reserves, the amount of protected land in
St Lucia is very small (Table 13.9). There is no national parks
legislation. A good, broad conservation policy was articulated in
1977 but has yet to be implemented. Many of the tiny islands in
the area have been proposed for protection.

Conservation Initiatives

There are a number of NGOs on the island and these have
heightened public awareness about environmental issues. For
instance, St Lucia Natural Trust has done much to encourage
the conservation and development of national parks, while the
Caribbean Natural Resources Institute has been working on
community conservation and sustainable use of mangroves and
other forests for several years.

Introduction - St Vincent and
THE Grenadines

The Grenadines, made up of 31 islands and cays, contain no
moist forest and will not be considered further in this account.
The 345 sq. km island of St Vincent is dominated by a large
volcanic cone. La Soufriere, which rises to almost 1220 m; it
last erupted in 1979. This is separated from the Morne Garu
Mountains and the rest of the central massif by a deep trough.
The leeward side of the island is characterised by deep-cut val-

(1949) reported 151 trees on the island. Following Howard
(1974-89) there are eleven plant species endemic to St Lucia.
Regional endemism is about 12 per cent in the coastal dry zone
but increases to 40-50 per cent in the flora of the primary rain
forest and montane forest (CCA/IRF. 1991e).

There are nine bat species recorded on the island (Varona.
1974). These include three regional endemics, Monophylliis
pletliodon, Ardops nicljollsi and Brachyphylla cuveriiaruiu
(Johnson, 1988). There are also several introduced mammals
including the opossum Didelphis marsiipialis insulahs, agouti
Dasyprocta aguti, mongoose Herpestes auropunctatus and
some rat and mice species.

There are 51 resident bird species on St Lucia (WCMC,
1992) of which four are endemic. These are the St Lucia parrot
Amazonci versicolor. Semper" s warbler Leucopeza .•icmperi. St
Lucia black finch Melanospiza ricliard.soni and St Lucia oriole
Icterus laudabilis. Of these, the parrot and warbler are

Table 13.9 Conservation areas in St Lucia

Existing conservation areas in lUCN categories I-IV are listed.
Marine reserves are not included.

National Park
Pigeon Island

Nature Resene
Maria Island
Fregate Island

Reser\'e
Marigot

Saiictuaiy

Parrot Sanctuary

Total

Area (sq. km)
0.2

0.1
O.I

0.1

15
15.5

134

Lesser Antilles

leys and high vertical coastal clitTs. while on the windward side
the valleys tend to be wider and flatter, opening onto a fairly flat
coastal plain.

The climate on the island is similar to that of St Lucia.
Highest elevations receive most rainfall, up to 7000 inm in
some places, while the valleys and coastal plains receive only
2000 mm or thereabouts. Hurricanes cause extensive damage.

St Vincent's early history of occupation is similar to that of
St Lucia. Arawak Indians were conquered by Caribs who, in
turn, were forcibly ousted by the British in 1797, even though
St Vincent was one of the islands the French and British had in
1748 agreed to designate as "neutral territory" for the sole
benefit of the Caribs. The islands became an independent state
within the British Commonwealth in 1979. Most (65 per cent)
of the population are descendants of African slave labour and
only two per cent are Amerindians (Birdsey et al., 1986). The
population in 1989 was estimated at 104,000, making the
island one of the two most densely populated in the Lesser
Antilles, the other being Grenada. The population is largely
concentrated along the less steep coastal areas, particularly
around Kingstown, the capital, but also in Mesopotamia
Valley and on the leeward coast in Layou and Barrouallie
(CCA/IRF, 199 If).

St Vincent's economy has traditionally been dependent on
export crops. Bananas support approximately 85 per cent ot St
Vincent's population and account for the majority of exports
(CCA/IRF, 199 If).

Forest Resources and Management

The distribution of the vegetation on St Vincent as indicated by
Beard in 1949 is shown on Figure 13.7. Birdsey et al. (1986)
estimated that, in 1984, around 130 sq. km of St Vincent was
forested. However, only 16 sq. km of this was undisturbed pri-
mary forest (Table 13.10). FAO (1993a) reports that by 1990,
the forest had been reduced to 1 10 sq. km.

A small area of mangrove occurs around a pond at Milkin
Bay on the south coast, and a few other smaller areas are present
on the island. It is, however, probable that mangroves were
never very extensive on St Vincent. Somewhat larger areas are
found on the Grenadines, the biggest at 2 1 ha on Union Island.

The primary forest remains only on the largely inaccessible
interior mountain ridges and at the heads of deep steep valleys
of the leeward coast. Due to the steep, rugged terrain and lack of
access, it is unlikely that these forests will be harvested in the
near future. The term secondary forest was applied to a broad
spectrum of forests disturbed either by natural occurrences such
as hurricanes and volcanic eruptions or by humans (Birdsey et
al.. 1986).

Dacroxdes excelsa, Onnosia monospernia. Actinostemen
carlbeus and Talawna dodecapetala together comprise 59 per
cent of all sawtimber (Birdsey et al.. 1986). There is only a
small primary forest industry on the island which supplies about
15 per cent of the lumber demand via a few pit sawyers. The
secondary forest industry, though well developed, makes most
of its products from imported wood.

There is very little plantation on the island, around 5 sq. km.
Most of this (70 per cent) is blue mahoe Hibiscus elatus, with
Caribbean pine Pinus caribaea and mahogany Swietenia macro-
phylla and S. mahagoni making up much of the remainder. With
little possibility of harvesting timber from the remaining natural
forests, the best hope for increasing timber production is through
increasing the area of plantations (CCA/IRF, 199 IF). Annual
planting has ranged from only 2 to 4 ha per year (Prins, 1986).

There is no formal written forest policy and no forest man-
agement plans have been prepared for the island.

Deforestation

Most of the land below 300 m has been cultivated for many
years as have many of the deep valleys at higher elevations.
However, in recent years, much upslope expansion of agricul-
ture has occurred, mostly to plant bananas. Many very steep
slopes have been cleared and planted by shifting agriculturalists
as land is in very short supply and the population is increasing.
Collection of wood for fuel may be a serious problem but no
data exist on the extent of this. Deforestation is estiinated to be
3 sq. km per year, a rate of 2. 1 per cent (FAO, 1993a).

Natural hazards such as volcanic eruptions, hurricanes and
severe tropical storms have also caused deforestation on the
island. For instance, almost 28 sq. km, or eight per cent of the
island was deforested by the 1979 eruption of Soufriere
(Birdsey <?r«/.. 1986).

Biodiversity

There are four amphibian species on St Vincent: the introduced
cane toad Bitfo marinus. two tree frogs Eleutherodactylus john-
stonei and E. urichi) and a foam-nesting frog Leptodactylus fal-
Ui\ (Corke, 1992). None is endemic to the island but E. john-
stonei is found only in the West Indies.

Twelve reptiles are found on the island of which eleven are
native and three endemic to St Vincent (Corke, 1992). The
endemics are the tree lizards Anolis griseus and A. triiiitatis and
a snake Chironius vinceuti. The snake is considered to be rare
(Groombridge, 1993).

St Vincent and the Grenadines are reported to hold 95
species of breeding land birds (Faaborg and Arendt, 1985), with
four seabird species breeding on St Vincent and 12 on the
Grenadines (Halewyn and Norton, 1984). Only one species, the
St Vincent parrot Amazona guildingii. is listed as threatened by
Collar et al. ( 1992). The whistling warbler Catharopeza bisliopi
is the only other bird endemic to the island.

Most of the native mammals on St Vincent and the
Grenadines are bats, eight species occur of which three are
regional endemics. There are also seven introduced mammal
species, including the opossum Didelplus marsiipialis. the mon-
goose Herpestes aiiropiinctatiis and the agouti Dasyprocta
aguti. The only native, non-flying mammal was the now extinct
endemic rice rat Oryzomys victus.

Conservation Areas

The St Vincent Botanical Garden, established in 1765, is the
oldest such site in the Western hemisphere. In 1791, it was also

Table 13.10 Area of forest a

ind woodland in St

Vincent in 1984

Forest type

Area (sq.km)

Area (per cent)

Young secondary

forest

35.7

10.5

Secondary forest

37.06

10.9

Primary forest

16.32

4.8

Plantation forest

0.34

0.1

Palm forest

17.34

5.1

Elfin woodland

9.52

2.8

Dry scrub forest

13.26

3.9

Total

129.54

38.1

Source: BMxy el al. (1986)

135

Lesser Antilles

ST. VINCENT/NATURAL VEGETATION (Circa 1949)

W/iMM Dry Scrub Woodlands
^TTTT^i Rain Foresi
irrm Palm Brake

1 Elfin Woodland

^ Secondary Forest

1 Non-forest Land

Figure 13.7 The vegetation on St Vincent as recorded by

Beard in 1949. 5r<u;rc; CCA/IRF(l99ir) based on Beard (1949)

the first Eastern Caribbean island to establish a forest reserve.
Indeed, the Order setting King's Hill aside is thought to be the
first piece of legislation providing for protected areas in the
Americas (lUCN, 1992). In 1912. all land above 1000 feet in
elevation was designated as crown property, reserved by law to
protect forests in the upper watershed. However much
encroachment, legal and illegal, has occurred and little protec-
tion of the area takes place.

A national parks system is being considered but is not fully
approved. There are six forest reserves, three designated as cate-
gory IV. and 23 wildlife reserves, all in category IV and all
gazetted in 1987. but for none of these is the si/e known so they
have not been listed here. Almost all of the wildlife reserves are
islands within the Grenadines. An area of 44 sq. km in the cen-
tre of St Vincent was declared a reserve in 1 987. particularly for
the protection of St Vincent's parrot.

Conservation Initiatives

At the end of the 1980s the Government took significant steps
to focus public attention on environmental concerns. A new-
Ministry of Health and the Environment was created in 1989.
The Prime Minister designated the 1990s as the Decade of the
Environment in St Vincent and established an Environment
Protection Task Force to assist the government in developing an
environmental agenda and programme.

A five year forestry assistance programme (1989-1994)
funded by CIDA is currently addressing many of St Vincent's
problems. A National Forest Management Plan is being pre-
pared as part of this programme. The boundaries of the forest
reserves will be surveyed and marked and the number of people
working in the Forestry Division will be increased. Forest man-
agement policies and a draft Forest Resources Conservation Act
have been prepared. The new act. replacing a 1945 law. will
greatly expand the power of the Forestry Division. An environ-
mental education programme is also part of the CIDA project.

References

Beard. J.S. (1949). The natural vegetation of the Windward and

Leeward Islands. Oxford Forestry Memoirs No. 21.

Clarendon Press. Oxford. U.K.
Birdsey. R.. Weaver. P. and Nicholls. C. (1986). The Foresi

Resources of St Vincent. West Indies. Research Paper SO-

229. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Forestry Service.

Southern Forest Experimental Station. New Orleans. LA.
Blockstein. D.E. (1988). Two endangered birds of Grenada.

West Indies: Grenada dove and Grenada hook-bill kite.

Caribbean Journal of Science 24: 127—136.
Cater. J. ( 1944). Forestry in ll^e Leeward Islands. Development

and Welfare in the West Indies Bulletins. No. 7. Advocate

Co., Ltd., Bridgetown, Barbados.
CCA/IRF (1991a). Antigua and Barbuda Eiivironmeiual

Profile. Caribbean Conservation Association, St Michael,

Barbados/Island Resources Foundation, St Thomas, U.S.

Virgin Islands.
CCA/IRF (1991b). Dominica Environmental Profile. Caribbean

Conservation Association, St Michael, Barbados/Island

Resources Foundation, St Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
CCA/IRF (1991c). Grenada Environmental Profile. Caribbean

Conservation Association, St Michael, Barbados/Island

Resources Foundation, St Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
CCA/IRF (I991d). St Kitts and Nevis Environmental Profile.

Caribbean Conservation Association, St Michael,

Barbados/Island Resources Foundation. St Thomas. U.S.

Virgin Islands.
CCA/IRF (I99le). St Lucia Environmental Profile. Caribbean

Conservation Association. St Michael. Barbados/Island

Resources Foundation. St Thomas. U.S. Virgin Islands.
CCA/IRF (1 99 If). St Vincent and the Grenadines

Environmental Profile. Caribbean Conservation Association.

St Michael. Barbados/Island Resources Foundation. St

Thomas. U.S. Virgin Islands.
Centre d'Eludes de Geographic Tropical ( 1980). La Guadeloupe

— Planche 9 — Vegetation. Scale 1:1,50.000. Atlas des

Departements d'Outre-Mer.
Collar. N.J.. Gonzaga, L.P., Krabbe, N., Madroiio Nieto, A.,

Naranjo, L.G., Parker III, T.A. and Wege, D.C. (1992).

Threatened Birds of the Americas. The ICBP/IUCN Red Data

Book. ICBP, Cambridge, U.K.
Corke, D. ( 1992). The status and conservation needs of the ter-
restrial herpctofauna of the Windward Islands (West Indies).

Biological Consen'ation 62: 47-58.
Davis, S.D.. Droop, S.J.M., Gregerson, P., Henson. L.. Leon.

C.J.. Villa-Lobos. J.L. Synge, H. and Zantovska. J. (1986).

Plants in Danger. What do we know'.' lUCN, Gland.

Switzerland and Cambridge, U.K.
De Milde, R. (1987). Inventory of the Exploitable Fm-esls of

Dominica. FAO, Rome, Italy.

136

Lesser Antilles

EARTHSTAT(1986). Preparation ol" natural vegetation map for
Dominica. West Indies from 1:26,000 scale, blaciv and white
aerial photography, final report. Prepared by Earth Satellite
Corporation for OAS. Washington. DC.

Eschweiler. J. (1982). Explanatory Nate to the Laud Use Maps
of Grenada, Carriacoii and Petite Martinique (1982 Scale
1:25.000). Land Use Division. Ministry of Agriculture. St
Georges, Grenada.

Evans, P.G.H. (1986). Dominica multiple land use project.
Ambio 15(2): 82-89.

Faaborg, J. and Arendt, W. (1985). St Lucia. In: Wildlife
Assessments in the Caribbean, pp. 127-157. Institute of
Tropical Forestry. USDA. Forest Services. Rio Piedras.
Puerto Rico.

FAO (1991). Tropical Forestry Action Plan: St Lucia. FAO,
Rome Italy.

FAO (1993a). Forest resource assessment 1990: tropical coun-
tries. FAO Forestry Paper 1 12. FAO. Rome. Italy.

FAO (1993b). TFAP Update 30. FAO, Rome. Italy.

Fiard, J. -P. (1992). Arbres rares et menaces de la Martinique.
Collection regionale connaissance du patrimoine No 1 .

GOG/OAS (1988). Pkm and Policy for a System of National
Parks and Protected Areas. Government of Grenada and
Organisation of American States. Department of Regional
Development. OAS, Washington, DC.

Groombridge. B. (Ed) (1993). J994 lUCN Red List of
Threatened Animals. lUCN. Gland, Switzerland and
Cambridge, U.K. 286 pp.

Groome, J. ( 1970). A Natural History of the Island of Grenada.
Caribbean Printers Ltd.. Arima, Trinidad.

Halewyn, R. van and Norton, R. (1984). The status and conser-
vation of seabirds in the Caribbean. In: Status and
Conser\-ation of the World's Seabirds. Croxall. J., Evans, P.
and Schreiber, R. (eds). ICBP Technical Publication No. 2.
ICBP. Cambridge, U.K. Pp. 169-222.

Hilder (1989). The Birds of Nevis. Nevis Historical and
Conservation Society. Charlestown, Nevis.

Honacki, J.H., Kinman, K.E. and Koeppl. J.W. (1982). Mammal
Species of the World. Allen Press Inc. and The Association of
Systematics Collections, Lawrence. Kansas, U.K.

Howard R.A. (ed.) (1974-1989). Flora of the Lesser Antilles.
Leeward and Windward Islands. 6 vols. Arnold Arboretum,
Jamaica Plain, Massachusetts, U.S.A.

Howard, R.A. (1989). The Lesser Antilles. In: Floristic
Inventory of Tropical Forests: the Status of Plant
Systematics. Collections, and Vegetation, plus
Recommendations for the Future. Campbell, D.G. and
Hammond, H.D. (eds). The New York Botanical Garden.
New York. U.S.A. Pp. 347-349.

lUCN (1992). Protected Areas of the World: A review of
national systems. Volume 4: Nearctic and Neotropical.
lUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, U.K.

Johnson, T.W. (1988). Biodiversity and Conservation in the
Caribbean: Profiles of Selected Islands. ICBP Monograph
No. 1. ICBP. Cambridge, U.K.

Lugo, A.E., Schmidt, R. and Brown. S. ( 1981). Tropical forests
in the Caribbean. Ambio 10 (6): 319-324.

Mills. F. (1988). Wildlife Management in St Kitts. Proceedings

of the fourth workshop of Caribbean foresters, Dominica,

April 4-6, 1988. Institute of Tropical Forestry, Rio Pedras,

Puerto Rico.
Morello, J. (1983). Ecological Diagnosis of Antigua and

Barbuda. Organisation of American States, Department of

Regional development, Washington. D.C.
Morris, M. and Lemon, R. (1982). The Effects of Development

on the Avi-fauna of St Kitts. West Indies. McGill University,

Montreal, Quebec.
OAS (1984). Saint Lucia — Land Use and Vegetation. Scale

1:50,000. Prepared by the Department of Regional

Development of the Organisation of American states, with the

collaboration of the Ministry of Agriculture, Lands, Fisheries,

Co-operatives and Labour of the Government of St Lucia.
OAS (1990). Natural Resources Assessment, Application and

Projects for the Agricultural Sector of Antigiui and Barbuda.

Department of Regional Development. Organisation of

American States, Washington, DC.
ONE (1990). Note sur la Politique Forestiere de L' Office

National des Forets en Guadeloupe. Unpublished report.

L'Office National des Forets
Piitz. P. ( 1983). Forest Inventoiy Report. Prepared for CIDA for

the St Lucia-CIDA Forest Management Assistance Project,

Ottawa, Canada.
Prins. P. ( 1986). St Vinceiu and the Grcnadittes Forestry Sector

Analysis: revision and update. Canadian International

Development Agency.
Prins. P. (1987). Forestry Policy and Administration

1987-1997. Natural Resources and Rural Development

Project. Commonwealth of Dominica. Department of

Regional Development. OAS, Washington. DC.
Putney. A.D. (1982). Survey of Conservation Priorities in tlte

Lesser Antilles: Final Report. Eastern Caribbean Natural

Area Management Program, St Croix, US Virgin Islands.
Rodrigues, D. (1990). Dominant Flora and Vegetation Zones of

Nevis. Vanier College Press. St Laurent, Quebec, Canada.
Scheele. R. (1989). Morne Trois Pitons National Park

Management Plan 1 990-2000. Draft report prepared for the

Division of Forestry and Wildlife. Dominica. OAS.

Washington, DC.
Short, L.L. (1974). Habits of thiee endemic West Indian wood-
peckers (Aves: Picidae). American Museum Novitates 2549.
Sloane. H. (1707). A Voyage to the Islands of Madera.

Barbados. Neives. St Christopher and Jamaica. Volume 1.

London. England.
Varona. L.S. (1974). Catdlogo de los Mamiferos Vivientes y

E.xtinguidos de las Antillas. Academia de Ciencias de Cuba.
WCMC (1992). Global Biodiversity: Status of the Earth s

Living Resources. Chapman & Hall. London. U.K.

Authors: Martin Jenkins and Caroline Harcourt. Cambridge
with contributions from Steve Bass, IIED, London; Dan
Chalmers, Taverham. Norfolk and Frank Wadsworth, Southern
Forest Experiment Station, Puerto Rico.

137

14 Puerto Rico

Country areo 8900 sq. km

Land area 8860 sq km

Populotion (niid-1994) 3.6 mill™

Population growth rate 1 .0 per cent

Population projected to 2025 47 million

Gross national product per capita (1992) USS6610

Forest (FAO, 1993) 3210 sq km

Annual deforestation rote (1981-1990) +1 4 per tent

;

Industrial roundwood production —

Industrial roundwood exports —

■i><X

Fuelwood and charcoal production —

^ .'W..--^

Processed wood production —

Processed wood exports —

■' _

By the beginning of this century, Puerto Rico had already lost over 80 per cent of its forest cover. By the middle of the
century, there was as little as 34 sq. km of virgin forest remaining. However, in the past 40 years, following the col-
lapse of the sugar cane industry and the abandonment of much of the agricultural land, there has been a dramatic
increase in the forest cover.

Introduction

The island of Puerto Rico is the easternmost and smallest of the
Greater Antilles. It can be divided into three main physiographic
units: a south-central volcanic mountainous region varying from
600-1338 m in elevation forming the Central Cordillera; a belt
of rugged karst topography in the north-central and north-west-
em parts of the island; and a discontinuous fringe of coastal
plains.

Daily and annual temperature changes are minor although
there are variations over the island. The lowest mean annual
temperature is 18°C at Pico del Este and Cerro Maravilla and
the highest is 27°C at Guayama on the south coast (Birdsey and
Weaver, 1982). Average annual precipitation is 1800 mm, with
coastal areas receiving 750 mm, while the summit of Luquillo
receives over 4000 mm. A relatively dry season occurs from
mid-December to the end of March (Birdsey and Weaver,
1982). Hurricanes occur quite commonly.

Puerto Rico was originally colonised by Igneris Amerindians
around 100 AD. Late in the 15th century, the aggressive Tainos
tribe colonised the east of the island, but they were displaced by
the arrival of Europeans in 1508. Puerto Rico"s population den-
sity, at 406 inhabitants per sq. km, is one of the highest in the
world. The greatest population centres are located in the coastal
plains, with o\er half the island's inhabitants concentrated in the
metropolitan area surrounding the capital city of San Juan
(Vivaldi. 1989). About 74 per cent of the people are urban
dwellers. The island is a self-governing commonwealth in free
association with the USA, and many Puerto Ricans live in the
USA.

The major agricultural product is sugar cane, but there has
been a change in emphasis from an agrarian economy to one
based on light industry and business. Tourism is the third most
important industry, after manufacturing and agriculture.

The Forests

Little and Wadsworth (1964) give a description of the different
types of forest that used to occur on Puerto Rico and show eight
climax forest types on their map — reproduced here as Figure

14.1. Not shown on this figure are the small patches of littoral
woodland or mangrove.

Holdridge"s Life Zone system has been used in this chapter
to classify the forests of Puerto Rico (Ewel and Whitmore,
1973; Figure 14.2).

The Subtropical Dry Forest is characterized by deciduous
vegetation, often with small and succulent leaves and spines or
thorns. Canopy height is rarely above 15 m. Common trees
include Bursera simaruba. Prosopis juliflora, Cepkalocereus
royenii and Picretia aculeata. This zone covers 18 per cent of
the island.

The Subtropical Moist Forest zone is the most widespread,
occupying over 58 per cent of the island, but little forest
remains in the area. The trees in this forest type are up to 30 m
in height, many are deciduous and epiphytes are common.
Giiassi atteiuiara. an endemic palm species, is a conspicuous
component of the limestone hill forests. The serpentine-derived
soils in the south-west of the island support a unique vegetation
which contains a number of endemics. The trees tend to be slen-
der and only 12 m or so high. Species common in the moist for-
est zone include Roystonea borinquena, Tabehuia heteropbylla.
Ei-ythrina poeppigianci. Inga vera and /. lamina. Species of
Nectandra and Ocotea are prominent in many of the older sec-
ondary forests. Inland from the mangroves in this zone are rem-
nants of swamp forests dominated by Pterocarpits officinalis.

The Subtropical Wet Forest zone covers about 23 per cent of
the island. The forests contain more than 150 species of trees
and have a closed canopy at around 20 m. Dominant trees are
Dacryodes excelsa. Sloanea berleriana and Manilkara
bidentata. Epiphytic ferns, bromeliads and orchids are abundant.

The Subtropical Rain Forest zone is found in only a small
area on the Luquillo Mountains. Species composition is similar
to that in the wet forest, but there is a high frequency of the
palm Prestoea monlana and more epiphytes.

The Subtropical Lower Montane Wet Forest life zone occurs
in both the central and eastern parts of the island up to the sum-
mits of most mountains above 1000 m and occasionally extend-

138

Puerto Rico

Figure 14.1 Climax forest types and forest regions of Puerto Rico

Source: Lillie and Wadsworth ( 1964)

ing down to almost 700 m. The forest is less rich than the sub-
tropical wet forest with only 53 tree species recorded. Cyrilla
racemiflora is probably the most abundant tree, though Ocotea
spathulata. Micropholis chrysophylloides and M. garciniaefolia
are also common, at least in eastern Puerto Rico (Wadsworth,
1951). Elfin woodland and palin brake associations are found in
this forest zone.

The Subtropical Lower Montane Rain Forest is present only
on the Luquillo Mountains. Species are similar to those in the
Lower Montane Wet Forest, but epiphytes, palms and tree ferns
are more common in the Rain Forest.

Mangroves

It is estimated that mangroves may have once covered about
240 sq. km in Puerto Rico (Wadsworth, 1968). Exploitation of
the trees for fuel and wood during the Spanish period, a series
of destructive hurricanes and reclamation of land for agriculture
meant that the mangroves were reduced to around 64 sq. km by
the 1930s (Can-era. 1975; Martinez et ai. 1979). Although this
had increased slightly by 1959, urban development and industri-
alisation caused further destruction in the 1960s (Wadsworth,
1959). In 1979, Martinez et al. (1979) estimated that less than
60 sq. km remained.

Forest Resources and Management

When European colonists arrived on Puerto Rico in 1508, the
island was almost completely forested (Wadsworth, 1950;
Birdsey and Weaver. 1987). From 1815, when the island was
opened to international trade, clearing took place at a geometric
rate (Table 14.1) so that Dansereau (1966) reported "The plant
cover of the Island of Puerto Rico is now entirely controlled by
man. There is no such thing as virgin vegetation, whether for-
est, savana. scrub, or grassland". However, other writers
report that a few tiny areas of virgin forest, covering 0.4 per
cent of the island or 34 sq. km, did survive to the middle of the
20th century (Table 14.2). Some 22 sq. km of this was in the
Luquillo Mountains, while other areas were left in Carite, Toro

Negro, Guilarte, Maricao and on a few mountain tops that were
in private ownership (Wadsworth, 1950; Birdsey and Weaver.
1982).

Puerto Rico's forest area has increased dramatically in the
last 40 years as shown in Table 14.1. Although the different def-
initions of "'forest" used by the various authors make the esti-
mates not entirely comparable or reliable, they do give an indi-
cation of the trends over time. The increase in forest is a result
of the new growth on the marginally productive pastures and
croplands which have been deserted as a result of the migration
of the rural population. Nevertheless, Table 14.1 gives an opti-
mistic estimate of the present forest extent. A comparison with
Table 14.2 from Brash (1987) gives an indication of how little
virgin forest is left on the island.

Using a 1985 survey as a baseline, FAO ( 1993) estimates for-
est cover in Puerto Rico to be 3210 sq. km, with 490 sq. km in

Table 14.1 Historical Estimates of Forest Area for Puerto Rico.

Year of estimate

Forest Area (sq.

km)

Referen

c. 1500

8.500

1 and

1828

5,870

1899

1,820

1912

1,690

1916

1,780

1931

810

1948

570

1960

820

1972

2.840

NB Different definitions of "forest" were used for these estimates, which makes
comparisons somewhat unreliable.

References; I. Murphy. 1916; 2. Wadsworth. 1950; 3. Gill. 1931; 4. Koenig. 1953; 5. Englerth.
I960: 6. Department of Natural Resources. 1972,

Source: Birdsey and Weaver ( 1 982)

139

Puerto Rico

Table 14.2 Per cent of the island covered in different woody vege-
tation between the years of 1770-1978.

Cover

Year
1770 1830 1899 1912 1949 1972 1978

Virgin 94.0 60.2 0.9 0.9 0.4 0.4 0.4

Coffee shade 0.01 0.4 8.9 7.8 7.8 8.5 4.7

Brush and scrub _ _ ^ 18.8 17.3

Secondary growth 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.4 33.0 32.3

Total* 94.0 60.6 9.8 27.5 36.9 41.9 37.4

* T()l:il area of the island used here is 8,628 sq km. Ihis excludes offshore islands
Xoimf,Brash(l987l

the tropical rain forest zone. 1510 sq. km in the moist deciduous
zone and 1210 sq. km in the hill and montane forest zone.
FAO's "forest"" figures include any area with trees having over
10 per cent canopy cover. Birdsey and Weaver ( 1982) give a
breakdown of the different forest types in the country in 1980
(Table 14.3). which is somewhat different from that given by
FAO.

Forest plantations have had a significant role in reforestation.
The major species planted is Piniis caribaea. with mahogany
Swietenia nuicrophylUi and Suietenia inahagoni. eucalyptus
Eucalyptus rohusla. teak Tectona grundis and others also being
planted. Most reforestation is, however, occurring naturally.

Although consumption of wood and wood products on the
island continues to rise, almost all of these are imported. The
harvesting of wood from the forests is almost negligible at pres-
ent, but it is suggested that with proper management the regen-
erating forests could provide Puerto Ricans with some wood in
the future (Wadsworth and Birdsey. 1985).

Table 14.3 Areas of different forest types in Puerto Rico in 1980

Forest Zone All forest laiul* TimberUmil Noncoinmercial

forest land

Dry forest

405

Moist forest

1.224

Wet forest

1 .037

Rain forest

LM Wet forest

LM Ram forest

tal

2,787

604
701

1.305

405

620

336

1.482

LM — Lower Monlane

* Forest land — Land al least lU percent slocked by forest trees of anv si/e. or formerly hav-
ing had such forest tree cover and not currently developed for nonforest use.

+ Timberland — Forest land that is producing or is capable of producing crops of industrial
wood and is not withdrawn from timber utilisation. Coffee shade is included in this category.

Suurt

Birdsey and Weaver ( 1 9

Deforestation

E.xtensive clearing of the forests began when Puerto Rico was
opened to international trade, with the clearing peaking at a rate
of 0.86 per cent per year between 1830 and 1899 (Hill, 1899:
Murphy. 1916; Gill. 1931; Wadsworth. 1950). Much of the for-
est was cleared for sugar cane and coffee plantations or other
agricultural use.

Puerto Rico"s forests also suffer damage from hurricanes;
Hurricane Hugo in 1989 caused damage ranging from defolia-
tion to breaking and even overturning of trees (Basnet et al..
1992). However, according to FAO (1993). Puerto Rico is one
of only three countries in Latin America and the Caribbean to
be gaining forest at the present time. FAO (1993) estimates
annual regeneration of forest between the years of 1981 and
1990 to be 42 sq. km. an annual increase of 1.4 percent.

Figure 14.2 Holdridge"s Life Zones of Puerto Rico

Ewel and Whitmore ( 1973)

LJ Water bodies

^ Sutmopica] dry forest

H Subtiupical moist forest

t^ Subtiopica! wel forest

^ Subuopica] rain forest

UiU Lower nwntane wet fottst

B Lower montane niin forest

14U

Puerto Rico

Biodiversity

There are slightly over 3000 vascular plants on Puerto Rico and
its adjacent islands, these include introduced species (Davis el
III.. 1986). There are estimated to be 234 endemics; the highest
numbers arc found on the white sands of Tortuguero and on the
Luquillo Mountains (Vivaldi. 1989). There are 547 tree species
known to be native to Puerto Rico and another 203 species natu-
ralized there (Little and Wadsworth. 1964; Little el al., 1974).

The only native mammals on the island are fifteen species of
bat (Starrett, 1962). None is endemic to Puerto Rico and none is
listed as threatened by lUCN (Groombridge. 1993).

There are 46 reptiles (20 endemic) and 22 amphibians (14
endemic) in Puerto Rico (WCMC. 1992; Rivero. 1978). Of the
five reptiles listed as threatened by lUCN (Groombridge, 1993).
four are found on the small islands, rather than on the main
island of Puerto Rico, and three of these are endemic. The Mona
blind snake Typhlops monensis and the rhinoceros iguana
Cyclura corniita occur on Mona. the former is endemic; the
Monito gecko Sphaerodactylus micropilheciis occurs only on
Monito and giant anole Aiiolis roo.sevelri occurs only on
Culebra island and may even be extinct. The Puerto Rican boa
Epicrates inomaliis is endemic to the main island. There are
also three amphibians listed as threatened, the golden coqui frog
Eleutherodactylus jasperi and E. karlschmidtii, both endemic,
and the Puerto Rican crested toad Peltophiyne lemur, which
occurs also on the British Virgin islands.

Around 275 bird species have been recorded on the island
(Raffaele. 1989) of which 94 are resident breeding birds —
there are 12 endemic species. Six bird species on Puerto Rico
are listed as threatened by Collar et al. (1992), of which three
are endemic to the island. Numbers of the endangered Amazona
viltata dropped to 13 in 1975. due mainly to destruction of its
habitat but also as a result of hunting, the pet-trade and a variety
of other factors; further losses occurred as a result of Hurricane
Hugo in 1989. In 1992, after an intensive conservation pro-
gramme, wild populations were estimated at 40 and there were
58 in captivity. The other threatened endemics are the Puerto
Rican nightjar Caprimulgus noctitherus, a species of the dry
limestone forests, and the yellow-shouldered blackbird Ai;e!aiii.s-
xanthomas. The main cause of the decline of the once wide-
spread blackbird appears to be parasitism of its nest by the shiny
cowbird Mohnhnis honaiiensis, which is a recent invader of the
island (Wiley et al.. 1991 ).

The numbers of fish and invertebrates are unknown. Two of
the latter are listed as threatened, the Mona cave shrimp
Typhlatya moiiae and the Tuna cave roach A.spidiichus caverni-
cola. both are endemic (Groombridge, 1993).

early as 1876. before it was ceded to the US. However, the first
of the existing reserves to be established (in 1907) was the
Caribbean National Forest. This is now called the Luquillo
ExperiiTiental Station and, at 113 sq. km. is the largest reserve
on the island, but is classified as category VIII by lUCN and is
consequently not included in Table 14.4. It is, however, shown
on Figure 14.3. along with the Commonwealth Forests and
those protected areas in lUCN's categories I-IV for which data
are available.

Initiatives for Conservation

Several NGOs work in conservation including the Puerto
Rico Conservation Foundation and the Conservation Trust of
Puerto Rico. The former group, along with The Nature
Conservancy and Conservation International provide support
to run the conservation data centre of the Natural Heritage
Programme of Puerto Rico. This Programme, established in
1988, encourages coordination between governmental insti-
tutes and NGOs in order to improve selection and manage-
ment of protected areas.

Table 14.4 Conservation areas in Puerto Rico

Existing conservation areas in lUCN's categories I-IV.

Natural .\reas

Ballena 1

Cabezas de San Juan 1

Canon de San Cristobal 3

Hacienda Buena Vista 0.3

Hacienda La Esperanza 9

Laguna Guaniquilla 2

Lands adjacent to the Bioluminescent Bay I

Punta Yegua 0.3

Natural Reserx'es

Cayos de la Cordillera I

Estuarina Nacional Bahia Jobos 1 1

Isla Caja de Muertos 2

Isla de Mona 56

La Parguera 50

Laguna Tortuguero 10

Puerto Mosquito (Vieques) 4

Conservation Areas

Four US federal agencies and three Puerto Rican agencies are
involved in protected area administration. Private conservation
organisations also play a part.

Three categories of protected area have been created under
US federal legislation in Puerto Rico: national forest, national
wildlife refuge and national estuarine research reserve. The
Department of Natural Resources (DRN) is the local govern-
mental organisation responsible for nature conservation. The
Commonwealth Forest Service administers the 14 common-
wealth forests (covering around 240 sq. km; in lUCN's category
VIII), while the wildlife refuges and natural reserves are man-
aged by the Division of Sanctuaries and Natural Reserves —
both are part of DRN.

The Spanish proclaimed forest reserves on Puerto Rico as

Wildlife Refuge
Boqueron

Embalse de Guajataca
Embalse de Luchetti
Humacao

National Wildlife Refuge
Cabo Rojo
Culebra
Desecheo

Total

.Source.- WCMC (unpublished)

180.6

141

Puerto Rico

Figure 14.3 Protected areas of Puerto Rico, including Commonwealth Forests and Luquillo Experimental Station

SotiKi-: Lilllcand Wadsworlh ( 1964) and WCMC (unpublished)

References

Basnet, K., Likens, G.E., Scatena, F.N. and Lugo, A.E. (1992).

Hurricane Hugo: damage to a tropical rain forest in Puerto

Rico. Journal of Tropical Ecology 8: 47-55.
Birdsey, R.A. and Weaver, P.L. (1982). The Forest Resources

of Puerto Rico. U.S. Department Agricultural Forest Service

Resource Bulletin SO-85. Pp. 59. Southern Forest

Experiment Station, Louisiana, New Orleans.
Birdsey. R.A. and Weaver, P.L. (1987). Forest Area Trends in

Puerto Rico. Research Note SO-331. U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment

Station.
Brash, A.R. (1987). The history of avian extinction and forest

conversion on Puerto Rico. Biological Conservation 39(2):

97-111.
Carrera, C.J. (1975). Efectos historicos de la interaccion entre

los factores socioeconomicos y los manglares: el caso de

Puerto Rico. Memorias del Segundo Simposio latinoameri-

cano sobre Oceanografia Biologica. Universidad de Oriente,

Cumuna, Venezuela.
Collar, N.J., Gonzaga, L.P., Krabbe, N.. Madrofio Nieto, A.,

Naranjo, L.G., Parker IH, T.A. and Wege, D.C. (1992).

Threatened Birds of the Americas. The ICBP/IUCN Red Data

Book. ICBP, Cambridge, U.K.
Dansereau, P. (1966). Description and integration of the plant-
communities. In: Studies on the Vegetation of Puerto Rico.

Institute of Caribbean Science. Special Publication No. I.
Davis, S.D., Droop, S.J.M., Gregerson, P., Henson, L.. Leon,

C.J.. Villa-Lobos, J.L, Synge. H. and Zantovska. J. (1986).

Plants in Danger. What do we know'.' lUCN, Gland.

Switzerland and Cambridge, U.K.

Department of Natural Resources (1972). Natural, Cultural and
Environmental Resources Inventory. Land Use in Puerto
Rico. Unpublished document cited in Birdsey and Weaver
(1982).

Englerth, G.H. (I960). Forest Utilization in Puerto Rico.
Unpublished document cited in Birdsey and Weaver ( 1982).

Ewel, J.J. and Whitmore, J.L. ( 1973). The Ecological Life Zones
of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Research Paper
ITF-18. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern
Forest Experiment Station, Rio Piedras, Puerto Rico.

FAO ( 1993). Forest resources assessment 1990: Tropical coun-
tries. FAO Forestry Paper 1 12. FAO, Rome, Italy.

Gill, T. (193 1). Tropical Forests of the Caribbean. The Read-
Taylor Co., Baltimore, U.S.A. 318 pp.

Groombridge, B. (Ed) (1993). 1994 lUCN Red List of
Threatened Animals. lUCN, Gland, Switzerland and
Cambridge, U.K. 286 pp.

Hill, R.T. (1899). Notes on the forest conditions of Porto Rico.
USDA Bulletin No. 25, Washington.

Koenig, N.A. (1953). A Comprehensive Agricultural Program
for Puerto Rico. Department of Agriculture and
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Washington, DC, USA.
290 pp.

Little, E.L. and Wadsworth, F.H. (1964). Common Trees of
Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. Agriculture Handbook
No. 249. U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Washington. D.C. 548 pp.

Little, E.L., Woodbury, R.O. and Wadsworth, F.H. (1974).
Trees of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. Second Volume.
USDA Handbook No. 449. USDA Forestry Service,
Washington, D.C. Pp. 1024.

142

Puerto Rico

Martinez, R.. Cintron, G. and Encarnacion, L.A. (1979).

Mangroves in Puerto Rico: a slnictiiral inyenlory. Area of

Scientific Research, Department of Natural Resources, San

Juan. Puerto Rico.
Muipliy, L.S. (1916). Forests of Puerto Rico, past, present, and

future. USDA Bulletin No. 354. Washington.
Raffaele, H.A. (1989). A Guide to the Birds of Puerto Rico and

the Virgin Islands. Princeton University Press, Princeton,

USA.
Rivero, J. A. (1978) Los Anfiliios v Reptiles de Puerto Rico.

Editorial Universitaria. Universidad de Puerto Rico,

Mayaguez, Puerto Rico. 148 pp.
Starrett, A. (1962). The bats of Puerto Rico and the Virgin

Islands, with a check list and keys for identification.

Caribbean Journal of Science 2(1 ): 1-7.
Vivaldi, J.L. (1989). Puerto Rico. In: Floristic Inventory of

Tropical Countries: The Status of Plant Systematics.

Collections, and Vegetation plus Recotnntendations for the

Future. Campbell, D.G. and Hammond, H.D. (eds). The New

York Botanical Garden, New York, USA. Pp. 341-346.
Wadsworth, F.H. (1950). Notes on the climax forests of Puerto

Rico and their destruction and conservation prior to 1900.

Caribbean Forester 11 (1): 38-47.

Wadsworth, F.H. (1951). Forest management in the Luquillo
Mountains. l:The setting. Caribbecm Forester 1 I: 38-47.

Wadsworth, F.H. (1959). Growth and regeneration of white
mangrove in Puerto Rico. Caribbean Forester 20 (3 and 4):
59-7 1 .

Wadsworth, F.H. (1968). Clean water for the nation's estuaries.
In: Proceedings of the Puerto Rico Public Meeting. National
and Estuarine Pollution Study. Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration. Atlanta. Pp. 78-91.

Wadsworth. F.H. and Bird.sey. R.A. (1985). A new look at the
forests of Puerto Rico. Turrialha 35(1 ): 1 1-17.

WCMC (1992). Global Biodiversity: Status of the Earth's
Living Resources. Chapman and Hall. London. 594 pp.

Wiley, J.W.. Post. W. and Cruz. A. (1991). Conservation of the
yellow-shouldered blackbird Agelaius xanthomus, an endan-
gered West Indian species. Biological Conservation 55:
119-138.

Author: C. Harcourt. with contributions from F.N Scatena and
P.L. Weaver, International Institute of Tropical Forestry, Rio
Piedras, Puerto Rico.

143

15 Trinidad
and Tobago

Country area 51 30 sq, km
Land area 51 30 sq. km
Population (inid-1994) 1 3 million
Population growth rate 1 2 per tent
Population projected to 2025 18 million
Gross notional product per capita (1992) USS3940
Forest cover in 1 980 (see Mop)' 1 683 sq km
Forest cover in 1 990 (FAO, 1 993) 1 550 sq km
Annual detorestotion rote 1 980-1 990 2 4 per cent
Industrial roundwood production 65,000 cu m
Industrial roundwood exports 3000 cu m
Fuelwood and charcoal production 22,000 cu. m
Processed wood production 58,000 cu m
Processed wood exports —
■ For Trinidod only

> . ^'■-

% *

Compared to many of the Caribbean islands. Trinidad and Tobago still have a considerable percentage of their forest
cover remaining. Trinidad is the only country of tropical America with a substantial history of professional manage-
ment of natural forests; the first management plan was prepared almost 100 years ago. Although there are severe eco-
nomic and social pressures facing the country, the Forestry Division is optimistic that proposals in the National Forest
Resources Plan and the planned comprehensive system of conservation areas will protect the forests.

Introduction

Trinidad is the most southerly of the West Indian islands; it is
separated from the South American mainland by only I 1 km.
This island is about 80 km long. 59 km wide and covers an area
of 4828 sq. km. Tobago is 42 km long. 12 km wide and has an
area of about .^00 sq. km.

Trinidad has three mciuntain ranges which decrease in alti-
tude from the north. Cerro del Aripo in the Northern Range is
the highest point, rising to 914 m. The Central Range reaches
310 m at Mount Tamana, while Trinity Hills in the Southern
Range rises to 308 m. Undulating land, plains and swamps sepa-
rate the ranges and overall the island is relatively tlat. Tobago is
a more rugged island; it has a central Main Ridge running the
length of the island, reaching 576 m at Centre Point. There is
only a small area of coastal plain; this is in the south-west of the
island.

The dry season is from January to May. with the wet season
from June to December, but this is broken by a short dry period
of about three weeks between September and October. Rainfall
in Trinidad averages 2880 mm in the north and north-east and
1200 mm in the west and south-west. Average annual tempera-
tures are about 29 C during the day and 2rC at night. The
islands lie on the border of the hurricane zone; Tobago is occa-
sionally affected by hurricanes while they are very rare in
Trinidad.

Columbus sighted Trinidad in 1498 and the island was
colonised by the Spaniards in the 16th century, but was con-
quered by a British force and annexed to the British Crown in
1797 (Beard. 1945). Although Tobago was sighted at the same
time, it never became a Spanish colony. It was fought over by
the Dutch. English and French for more than 100 years until it
was recaptured by the English and ceded to Britain in 1763. h
continued to change hands until 1803 when the British won it
permanently. It was declared a ward of the combined colony of
Trinidad and Tobago in 1889.

People of African descent make up 41 per cent of the popula-
tion, Indians make up another 41 per cent, a further 16 per cent

are of mixed race, while Chinese, Europeans and others make
up the remainder. Most of Trinidad's population reside in the
west coastal area (James el al.. 1984). 64 per cent of them in
urban areas. Greatest population pressure occurs along a corri-
dor from west of the capital. Port of .Spain, skirting the foothills
of the Northern Range, to Sangre Grande in the east.

Oil is one of the country's leading industries; it represented
66 per cent of exports in 1990 (NRED, 1992). The importance
of agriculture to the economy is declining; it contributed only
four per cent to GDP in 1990. The major commodities are sugar
cane, cocoa, coffee and citrus (NRED, 1992).

The Forests

Beard (1945) classified the vegetation types of Trinidad as
shown in Table 15.1.

Most of the forests are seasonal — varying from evergreen to
deciduous depending on moisture. The following descriptions
are from Beard ( 1945) and FAO/UNEP (1981 ).

Evergreen seasonal forest is the most widespread in Trinidad.
It is found up to 250 or 300 m in altitude. This forest is three
storeyed with emergents up to 40 m. a closed canopy at between
12 and 30 in and a lower almost continuous canopy of shrubs
and small trees at 3 to 9 m in height. Lianes are fairly well
developed and epiphytes are common above 6 m. The two char-
acteristic trees of the upper layer are Carapa guianensis and
Eschweilera siibglandulosa. Other important species of the
upper canopy are Licania biglainliilo.\ci. Puchira insignis.
Stcrculia carihaea. Mora excelsu and two palm trees
Maximiliana caribaea and Scibal mciiiriiiiformis. There are
around 100 tree species per hectare. In some places. Mora
excelsa forms almost homogenous stands which are intensively
managed.

Semi-evergreen moist forest is found in drier areas. The
upper layer at around 24 m is discontinuous; there are a few
taller trees up to 30 m. A closed canopy occurs at 6-12 m.
Lianes are very common, but epiphytes are not luxuriant.

144

Trinidad and Tobago

Table 15.1 Vegetation types in Trinidad

Seasonal Formations

Evergreen Seasonal Forest
Semi-evergreen Seasonal Forest
Deciduous Seasonal Forest

Dry Evergreen Formations

Woodland
Littoral Woodlands

Montane Formations

Lower Montane Rain Forest
Montane Rain Forest
Elfin Woodland

Intermediate Formations

Seasonal Montane Forest

Swamp Formations

Swamp Forest
Palm Swamp
Herbaceous Swamp
Mangrove

Marsh Formations

Marsh Forest
Palm Marsh
Savanna

Important species are Peltogyne porphyrocardia. Trichilia
smithii. Brosiinum alicastrum, Biavaisia intergerrima, Moiiriri
marshali. Cuarea guara and Ficus tobagensis.

Even by 1945, there was virtually no undisturbed deciduous
seasonal forest remaining in Trinidad. The few surviving patches
are in the Northern Range. There is a highly discontinuous
emergent layer at 13-20 m and a lower storey at 3-10 m.
Characteristic species include Bursera simaruba, Lonchocarpiis
latifolius and Machaeriiim robinifolium.

The dry evergreen formations have a limited distribution,
mostly along the east coast. The trees are generally small, often
bent and have thick leaves.

Lower montane forest has an upper continuous canopy at
about 30 m with no emergents. Understorey trees are at any
height between 3 and 16 m with no marked layering. Neither
lianes nor epiphytes are common. Licania ternatensis, L.
biglandulosa, Sterculia caribaea and Byrsonima spicata are
dominant in the canopy layer. Calliandra guildingii and
Cassipourea latifolia occur commonly in the lower storey. This
forest type is confined to the Northern Range and occurs
between altitudes of about 300-800 m.

The montane or cloud forest occupies only a very small area
above 800 m on the Aripo Massif. The more or less closed
canopy reaches only 20 m and the trees are smaller in diameter
and less diverse than those lower down the mountains. Small
palms and tree ferns are common, climbers and epiphytes occur.
The dominant tree species in the canopy include Richeria gran-
dis. Eschweileia trinitensis and Licania biglandulosa. The last of
these is of localized abundance and is primarily characteristic of
the transitional zone to lower montane forest. The seasonal mon-
tane forest is confined to limestone outcrops in the Northern
Range — Inga macrophylla and Guarea guara are common.

There is a small area of elfin woodland on the Cerro del
Aripo. The canopy is formed of a dense layer of tree ferns and
small palms at about 3 m. There is also a discontinuous tree
layer emerging to reach about 7 m; Cliisia intertexta is the
major species in this layer — few other species are present. The
tree ferns Cyathea tenera and C. caribaea and the palms
Euterpe broadwayana and Prestoea pubigera are present.

Swamp forest, found in areas on the east coast, consists of
almost homogenous stands of Pterocarpus officinalis forming a
canopy at about 20 m. Palm swamps are also found on the
island. Main species are Roystonea oleracea and Mauritia spp.
No canopy is present, rather the palms (25-30 m tall) are scat-
tered above an understorey that varies between scrubby bush
and 20 m tall forest. Marsh forests, containing mostly palm

species, are of only local occurrence and are found mainly in
Trinidad's northern plain.

In Tobago, rain forest is found in sheltered valleys on interior
mountains. The principal species in the upper storey of this for-
mation are Carapa guianensis, Andira inermis, Hyeronima
caribaea and Eschweilera decolorant. Tresanthera pauciflora
and Styrax glaber are dominant species in the lower storey.
Some lower montane forest occurs. The major species in its
upper storey are Brysonima spicata, Licania biglandulosa,
Ternstroemia oligoslemon and Eschweilera decolorans, while
the lower level is occupied mainly by Euterpe broadwayana,
Stxra.x glaber and by species of the Myrtaceae family. Drier
elfin woodland also occurs on the island.

Mangroves

Faizool (1990) lists 17 locations of mangroves, varying in
extent from 9 ha in Godineau Swamp to 37.3 sq. km in Caroni
Swamp. He estimates the total area as 74.1 sq. km, including 1.7
sq. km in Tobago. Bacon (1991, 1993), however, lists 36 loca-
tions in Trinidad, 1 1 in Tobago and 2 on offshore islands with a
total area of 71.5 sq. km (Lacerda et al,, 1993). Somewhat lower
figures are given by Taylor (1989) and by Saenger et al. (1983);
they estimate 53 and 40 sq. km respectively. On Map 15.1,
mangroves cover 51 sq. km, but this was in 1980 or earlier (see
Map Legend).

The main species present are Rhizophora mangle,
Avicennia nitida and Laguncularia racemosa. R. harrisonii, A.
schaueriana and Conocarpus erectus also occur. Those man-
groves in the Nariva Swamp in the east of Trinidad are rela-
tively undisturbed, whereas those in the west, in Caroni
Swamp, have been more disturbed by man. Housing, roads
and industrial development have considerably reduced the area
of mangroves in Caroni Swamp. There is, however, now a
much greater awareness of the benefits provided by man-
groves and a consequent reduction in the wood cut from them
for firewood and charcoal. Caroni Swamp, with its magnifi-
cent colony of scarlet ibis Eudocimus ruber is a major attrac-
tion for locals and tourists.

Forest Resources and Management

According to some estimates, approximately 3075 sq. km or 60
per cent of the total land area of Trinidad and Tobago can be
classified as forest land, 80 per cent of this is state land
(Bacchus and McVorran, 1990; Table 15.2). According to
NRED ( 1992) this 60 per cent includes "natural and secondary
forests and swamps". Other authors suggest a somewhat lower
forest cover. For instance Faizool (1990) estimates a total of
2300 sq. km of proclaimed and unproclaimed forest reserves
and other forested state lands, while the estimate in FAO (1993)
is of only 1550 sq. km of forest remaining, all of which is con-
sidered to be closed broadleaved forest in the tropical rain forest

Table 15.2 Distribution of land in Trinidad and Tobago under forest
cover

Classification
Forest reserves
Other state lands
Private lands

Total

Source: Bacchus and McVorran ( 1 990)

Area (sq. km)

1,444

1,113

518

3,075

145

Trinidad and Tobago

^-i.

-C^

CZ3

Q»

■ •

f 2

146

Trinidad and Tobago

Extensive mangroves are found in Caroni Swamp, Western
Trinidad. (Mark Spalding)

zone. Map 15.1 shows the forests in Trinidad covering 1683 sq.
km (Table 15.3), but the source map is 14 years old and there is
no indication of when the data for this map were collected (see
Map Legend). No map or information on the extent of the
forests on Tobago has been found for this project.

An analysis of aerial photographs covering most of the State-
owned forest land during the 1978-1980 forest inventory gave
the areas of the forest types as shown in Table 15.4. This indi-
cates that state-owned natural forests covered around 35 per
cent of the islands at that time. The area of private forests is dis-
puted (Chalmers and Faizool, 1992). For many years, up to
1971, the annual reports of the Forestry Division gave a figure
of 105 sq. km for these forests. However, in the 1972 report a
figure of 544 sq. km was quoted, of which only 72 sq. km was
high forest and timber plantations while the rest was secondary
growth — the source for this information was a 1963 agricul
tural census.

The forest resources can be divided into protection and pro-
duction forests. Approximately 29 per cent of the state con-
trolled forests in Trinidad are devoted to environmental conser-
vation, while almost all of Tobago's forests are designated as
protection forests.

About 750 sq. km of Trinidad's natural forest have been clas-
sified as productive — i.e. intended for long term production of

timber — of which 160 sq. km are intensively managed.
However. Synnott (1988, 1989) considers all 750 sq. km to be
sustainably managed in that they are protected to a degree by
resident forest guards, there are defined management objectives
and working plans for the forests and the logging activities are
subject to at least some planning, supervision and control. This
professional management began in the 1920s and working plans
were written from 1935 onwards (Synnott, 1988). Continuous
forest inventory using permanent sample plots started in 1983 in
the natural forests. This is the only system of its kind estab-
lished as a tool of tropical forest management rather than as a
research study (Synnott, 1988).

Logging operations on public land in the natural forests are
controlled through the granting of conservators licences.
Ideally, this license system takes into account both silvicultural
and industrial considerations. Exploitation is controlled on a
basis of minimum girth limits and much of the forest has been
subject to area control using designated blocks of predetermined
size to ensure a sustained yield in the future. The timber is sold
on an individual tree basis and is sold only to registered
licensees. The annual reports of the Forest Department list the
top 30 tree species by volume cut and then give the volume cut
from all other species; the latter varies between 70 and 87
species. In 1955, the volume harvested was 151,600 cu. m, but
this has declined steadily so that in 1960, 100,680 cu. m were
cut and in 1971 only 64,674 cu. m. One factor has been the
decline in the use of firewood and charcoal. FAO (1994) esti-
mated that in 1992 around 65.000 cu. m of industrial round-
wood were harvested from the islands.

Over the period 1955-65, when timber production was prob-
ably at its peak, local forests provided an average of 72 per cent
of the annual timber requirements; by the 1980s this had fallen
to an average of II per cent. In 1983, imports of sawlogs
reached as high as 492,100 cu. m. with an annual average of
242.640 cu. m over the period of 1983-1988.

At present the Forest Act is very limited in relation to protec-
tion and management of timber; it is more concerned with the
sale of the resources (Bacchus and McVorran, 1990). Although
existing methods of harvest are wasteful, it is intended that the
timber resources be carefully developed to avoid environmental
degradation. One of the main risks of over-exploitation of the
natural forests arises from the fact that there are over 100 mar-
ketable species. This emphasises the need for thorough silvicul-
tural and management control on the ground to ensure that

Table 15.3 Estimates of forest extent in Trinidad

rest type Area

(sq. km)

% of land area

Lowland moist

,101

22.8

Degraded lowland moist

193

4.0

Submontane

244

5.1

Montane

<0.1

Degraded montane

<0.1

Dry

0.8

Swamp

1.0

Mangrove

1.1

Total

1,683

34.9

Area of Trinidad only — 4828 sq. km.
Based on analysis of Map 15.1. See Map Legend on p. 1 50 for details of sources.

147

Trinidad and Tobago

Table 15.4 Areas of the different forest types found in the state-
owned forest lands of Trinidad and Tobago

Forest Type

Area isq. km)

Edaphic swamp forest

164

Montane forest

225

Evergreen seasonal

1,152

Semi-evergreen seasonal

141

Dry evergreen seasonal

Deciduous seasonal

Plantations, inc non-timber

214

Secondary Forest

Total

1,998

Source: Synnott ( 1988)

exploitation does not irrevocably change the composition of the
forest. Greatest concern relates to the exploitation of mora Mora
excelsa. It has topped the sales list for many years, even though
the annual volume cut has dropped — from 21,875 cu. m
between 1971-79 to 11,860 cu m between 1983-88 — its con-
tribution in those years remained around 27 per cent of the total
volume sold. Another over-exploited species is matchwood
Didxinopaimx inorototoni. This can no longer supply the
demand from the local match factory — its wood has had to be
replaced entirely by aspen splints from Scandinavia.

For many years an undesirable feature of the local forestry
scene has been the excessive number of sawmills that are
licensed, from a peak of 91 in 1958 to an average of 65 in the
1980s. Most of them operate on a part-time basis and are not very
efficient in terms of converting roundwood into sawn timber.
There have been no recent studies, but the loss on conversion is
thought to average 35-40 per cent. With modem equipment and
good management, six to eight sawmills could cope with the logs
harvested locally, particularly since the State-owned enterprise
TANTEAK Ltd has a virtual monopoly on the raw material har-
vested from the government's pine and teak plantations.

The plantations are found almost wholly within forest reserves.
In 1990. Chalmers and Faizool (1992) estimated that the total
area of plantations was 152.5 sq. km. comprising 90.1 sq. km of
teak Tectona grandis, 42.1 sq. km of pine Finns caribaea and
20.3 sq. km of mixed hardwoods. It was estimated that around
16,000 cu. m of timber were harvested annually from these plan-
tations between 1986 and 1989. approximately 60 per cent of this
was teak (Bacchus and McVorran, 1990). Although the establish-
ment of plantations used to involve the clearing of degraded nat-
ural forest, they are now developed only on non-forest land.

Tree cutting on private land is generally not controlled and
there is little management of these areas. Some species require
permits from the Forestry Division before they can be trans-
ported along public roads, and it is only for these species that
outputs can be estimated (Bacchus and McVorran. 1990).

The severe economic and social pressures facing a large pro-
portion of the population has made it increasingly difficult to
maintain traditional levels of management and protection of the
forests. Indeed, the management plans for most forest reserves
are now in need of revision. Nevertheless, the Forestry Division
is optimistic that proposals contained in the National Forest
Resources Plan (Anon. 1989) will soon be formally adopted.
Supporting legislation and funding in conjunction with the
TFAP project is also expected in the near future.

Deforestation

The most obvious and some of the most severe deforestation has
taken place throughout the Northern Range, mainly as a result
of encroachment by squatters, shifting cultivation and the
inevitable burning of forest: the overall impact is exacerbated
by similar activities on many abandoned cacao estates. The
same occurs in parts of the Central Range Reserve, in the large
Victoria Mayaro Reserve and in the reserves in the drier south-
western area of Trinidad. Here the almost annual bush fires
spread into the teak plantations and the constant burning has
resulted in some of the worst soil erosion in the country.

A considerable volume of wood used to be sold for firewood
and charcoal. In the 1940s, around 60.000 cu. m were used
annually for this purpose, with the annual average volume being
38,500 cu. m between 1949 and 1960, of which about 85 per
cent was used for charcoal (Forestry Dept/Division Annual
Reports 1955-88). However, at this time the operation was well
controlled and officially monitored so it was generally not
destructive of the natural forest, but it became so in the 1960s
and 1970s when much of the cutting was illegal. Fortunately
with the increasing use of kerosene and gas the demand for
wood has declined. Since 1976 the Forestry Division annual
reports have not provided detailed information on the subject.

There is some illegal clearfelling of natural forests, but this is
usually on State Lands outside the forest reserves. FAO (1993)
estimates annual deforestation in Trinidad and Tobago between
the years of 1980 and 1990 to be as much as 2.4 per cent or 37
sq. km each year.

Biodiversity

Trinidad has one of the highest levels of biodiversity per unit
area of the Americas. Bacon (1978) gives a general overview of
the ecology of the country. There are 2281 flowering species
recorded on the islands of which 215 are endemic (Adams and
Baksh. 1981). Their main affinities are with South America
rather than the Antilles (Beard. 1945).

These islands are the richest in the Caribbean as far as num-
ber of mammal species goes — over 100 occur there, almost
half of which are bats.

Around 420 species of bird have been recorded on the
islands: these include 160 North and South American migrants
(ffrench. 1986: NRED, 1992). Only 180 or so of these birds are
seen on Tobago, but 18 of the species recorded on this island
have not been sighted on Trinidad (Tomlinson, 1981). Collar et
al. (1992) list only two threatened species for Trinidad and
Tobago. One of these, the Trinidad piping-guan Fipile pipile is
endemic and is considered endangered. It is found in primary
forest and now occurs only in two small, well separated popula-
tions on Trinidad. Hunting and habitat destruction are the causes
of its decline. The white-tailed sabrewing Campylopterus
eiisipennis is found in montane forest on Tobago, but also
occurs in north-east Venezuela. On Tobago, it is threatened by
forest destruction.

There are 70 species of reptiles, including 38 snakes, and 26
amphibians on the islands (NRED. 1992; see also Underwood.
1962 and Boos and Quesnel. 1969). As would be expected,
more of these species occur on Trinidad than on Tobago, but
there are three species of amphibians and two of reptiles that
occur in Tobago and not in Trinidad. There are two endemic
species in each of these groups (WCMC, 1992). No terrestrial
species are listed as threatened by lUCN (Groombridge, 1993).
There are 76 species of freshwater fish on the islands.

Most of the invertebrate fauna remains to be identified, but

148

Trinidad and Tobago

Table 15.5 Conservation areas in Trinidad and Tobago

Existing conservation areas in lUCN's categories 1-IV. For informa-
tion on Ramsar Sites see Chapter 8.

Game Sanctuaries

Bushi Bush*

Central Range*

Little Tobago'

Northern Range*

Saut d'Eau Island

0.1

Soldado Rock+

>0.1

Southern Watershed*

St Giles Island'

0.3

Trinity Hill*

Prohibited Areas

Aripo Savanna*

Caroni Swamp*

Nature Reserve

Bucco Reef

Total

176.5

Area with forest within its boundaries as shown on Map 15.1

Not mapped

See Figure 15- 1 for location of these areas in Tobago

there are at least 600 butterfly species present (NRED. 1992).
One beetle Aglyinbiis broineliarum is listed as threatened by
lUCN (Groombridge, 1993).

Conservation Areas

The country's first protected area, a game sanctuary, was created
on Tobago in 1928 (Bacchus and McVorran. 1990). There are
now 13 game sanctuaries in which the fauna receive total protec-
tion all year round. Most of these sanctuaries are within forest
reserves and a small amount of logging may be allowed in them
(Bacchus and McVorran. 1990). The nine in lUCN's categories
I-IV are listed in Table 15.5. The remaining four — with no cate-
gory allocated — are Caroni Swamp (2 sq. km). Kronstadt Island
(5 ha). Mome TEnfer (3 sq. km) and Valencia (28 sq. km).

It was not until 1980 that a policy for the establishment and
management of a national park network was initiated. Although
the government agreed in principle with the proposals in this
policy, no legislation has yet been enacted nor have the 61 pro-
posed protected areas been set up (James et al.. 1984; Bacchus
and McVorran. 1990).

An important aspect of the proposed National Parks policy is
the active encouragement of community involvement in all
aspects of the development and management of the parks.

There are also 35 forest reserves on the islands, but hunting
occurs in these and many are intended for long-term timber pro-
duction (James et a!., 1984; Synnott, 1988). There are also some
small, private but very actively run nature reserves. In the
absence of government clarity as to its conservation policy, sev-
eral NGOs are very concerned with conservation and manage-
ment of reserves.

The new Ministry of the Environment and National Service,
which was established in 1989. is responsible for the protected
areas. However, management of most areas, except Caroni
Swamp, is inadequate (lUCN. 1992).

Conservation Initiatives

There are a number of active, long-running conservation groups
on the islands. The Trinidad and Tobago Field Naturalists Club
(TTFNC) was founded in 1891 and is still going strong. In the
early 1950s, the New York Zoological Society established a tropi-
cal research station in the Arima Valley which attracted many
established and young scientists to the island. The station has been
taken over recently by the Asa Wright Nature Centre, which is
operated by a local Trust and has itself organised regular seminar
programmes over the last 25 years. The Pointe-a-Pierre Wildfowl
Trust has been functioning for nearly 30 years, encouraging the
conservation of wildlife on the refinery reservoirs of a local petro-
leum company. More recently, the Caribbean Forest Conservation
Association (CFCA) was established in Trinidad. Along with other
organisations, it prepared a substantial submission for considera-
tion by the TFAP Country Mission Team and it is very active in
lobbying the government and the public. The University of the
West Indies (UWI) is also a powerful voice in conservation issues.

The Northern Range Reforestation Project, started in 1971 as
an UNDP Technical Assistance Project, now with government
funding, continues to achieve its principal objectives — the con-
servation and regeneration of the natural forest in the Northern
Range. To date. 14.8 sq. km have been regenerated with an
acceptable level of survival and growth. Of equal importance
are the many initiatives that have been developed to persuade
the shifting cultivators/squatters to adopt more acceptable, less
damaging forms of land-use.

Some years ago. the Forestry Division made a long-term deci-
sion that any teak plantations located within a protected area
would, at rotation age, be replaced with local hardwood species
to provide a much more beneficial environment for wildlife.

A revision of the legislation addressing the conservation of
natural resources is underway (NRED, 1992).

Perhaps the most important conservation initiative in the
country is the proposal for the establishment of a Caribbean
International Institute for Forestry and the Environment (ClIFE)
at the Trinidad and Tobago Campus of UWI. It is planned that
this institute will provide training at undergraduate and postgrad-
uate levels in forestry/natural resources management, provide
leadership and extension services throughout the region in silvi-
culture, forest management, wildlife conservation and watershed
management and organise and sustain the research initiatives that
are vital in solving the region's environmental problems.

Figure

15.1 Tobago"

s protected areas

fO-8

60.7 6a6

8JS

Protected artas

-Si- Oles
tJand

- 11.3

^..-c-

lU -

Lllle

?b- ^^'..

- 11.2
Bucav

608

5 10 IS

\\2 -
i

H)l «!(>

H\5

149

Trinidad and Tobago

References

Adams, CD. and Baksh. Y.S. (1981). What is an endangered

plant? Z.;V(/!g World 1981-2; 9-14.
Anon (1989). The National Forest Resources Plan. Forestry

Division. Ministry of the Environment and National Service,

Trinidad.
Bacchus. C.F. and McVorran, G.M. (1990). The Role of

Forestry in Biological Diversity Conservation in Trinidad

and Tobago. Unpublished manuscript.
Bacon, P.R. (1978). Flora and Fauna of the Caribbean. An

Introduction to the Ecology of the Caribbean. Key Caribbean

Publications. Trinidad and Tobago.
Bacon, P.R. (1991). The Status of Mangrove Conservation in

the CARICOM Islands of the Eastern Caribbean. Report to

the EEC as part of the TFAP for the Caribbean Region.
Bacon, P.R. (1993). Mangroves in the Lesser Antilles, Jamaica,

Trinidad and Tobago. In; Conservation and Sustainable

Utilization of Mangrove Forests in Latin America and Africa

Regions. Part 1: Latin America. ITTO/ISME Project

PDl 14/90(F). Pp. 155-209.
Beard, J.S. (1945). The natural vegetation of Trinidad. O.xford

Forestry Memoirs 20; 1-152.
Boos, H. and Quesnel, V. (1969). Reptiles of Trinidad and

Tobago. Ministry of Education and Culture, Trinidad and

Tobago. Pp. 39.
Chalmers, W.S. and Faizool, S. (1992). Trinidad and Tobago

National Forestry Action Programme. Report of Country

Mission Team. FAO/CARICOM TFAP. GCP/RLA/098, U.K.
Collar, N.J., Gonzaga, L.P., Krabbe, N., Madrofio Nieto. A.,

Naranjo, L.G., Parker III, T.A. and Wege. D.C. (1992).

Threatened Birds of the Americas. The ICBP/IUCN Red Data

Book. ICBP, Cambridge, U.K.
Faizool, S. (1990). Some Forestry and Related Statistics.

Forestry Resource Inventory and Management Unit, Forestry

Division. Trinidad and Tobago.
FAO/UNEP (1981). Proyecto de Evaluacion de los Recursos

Forestales Tropicales. Los Recursos Forestales de la

America Tropical. FAO, Rome, Itlay.
FAO (1993) Forest resources assessment 1990: Tropical coun-
tries. FAO Forestry Paper 1 12. FAO, Rome, Italy.
FAO (1994). FAO Yearbook: Fore.st Products 1981-1992. FAO

Forestry Series No. 27. FAO Statistics Series No. 1 16. FAO,

Rome, Italy,
ffrench, R. (1986). Birds of Trinidad and Tobago. Macmillian

Caribbean. 87 pp.
Groombridge, B. (Ed) (1993). 1994 lUCN Red List of

Threatened Animals. lUCN, Gland, Switzerland and

Cambridge, U.K. 286 pp.
James, C, Nathai-Gyan, N. and Hislop. G. (1984). Neotropical

Wetlands Project. National Report on Trinidad and Tobago.

Prepared for IWRB/ICBP. Forestry Division. Ministry of

Agriculture Lands and Food Production.
lUCN (1992). Protected Areas of the World: A review of

national systems. Volume 4: Nearctic and Neotropical.

lUCN. Gland. Switzerland and Cambridge. U.K.
Lacerda. L.A., Conde. J.E., Bacon, PR.. Alarcon, C, D'Croz,

L., Kjerfve. B., Polani'a and Vannucci. M. (1993). Mangrove

ecosystems of Latin America and the Caribbean: a Summary.

In: Conservation and Sustainable Utilization of Mangrove

Forests in Latin America and Africa Regions. Part 1 : Latin

America. ITTO/ISME Project PDl 14/90(F). Pp. 1-42.

NRED (1992). National Report on Environment and

Development. Report presented to the United Nations

Conference on Environment and Development. Rio de

Janero. Brazil.
Saenger, P.. Hegerl. E.J. and Davie. J.D.S. (1983). (eds). Global

Status of Mangrove Ecosystems. Commission on Ecology

Papers No. 3. lUCN, Gland, Switzerland.
Synnott, T. (1988). Natural Forest Management for Sustainable

Timber Production: South America and the Caribbean. IIED.

London.
Synnott. T. (1989). South America and the Caribbean. In: No

Timber Without Trees. Poore D. (ed). Earthscan. London.
Taylor. J.G. (1989) (ed.) Manglares. La importancia

econdmica de los manglares en la politica. planeamiento y

manejo de los recursos naturales costeros. FUDENA,

Caracas.
Tomlinson. D. (1981). Treasures of sea and swamp: a naturalist

in Trinidad — II. Countiy Life October 8: 1227-1228.
Underwood, G. (1962). Reptiles of the Eastern Caribbean.

Caribbean Affairs. New Series 1: 1-192.
WCMC (1992). Global Biodiversity: Status of the Earth's

Living Resources. Chapman and Hall, London xx + 594pp.

Author; Caroline Harcourt with contributions from Steve Bass,
IIED and Dan Chalmers. Taverham, Norfolk.

Map 15.1 Trinidad

Forest data lor Trinidad (no data were found tor Tobagot have been digitised from the map
Inventory of tlie Indigenous Forest of Trinidad — Forest Resource Inventory- and Management
Section, which was published in 1980- This was prepared for the Government of Trinidad and
Tobago by Institutional Consultants (International) Ltd. in cooperation with the Forestry
Division Ministry of Agriculture, Lands and Fisheries and the Canadian International
Development Agency (CIDA). It is unclear how old the actual data are. but as the source map
itself is 14 years old. the estimates of forest extent should be treated with caution.

A variety of forest types are illustrated and have been amalgamated to form estimates of for-
est extent on Map 15.1. Harmonisation of the forest types is as follows;
Mangrove Edaphic Swamp Forest — mangrove

Swamp forest Edaphic Swamp Forest — paltn swamp: swamp forest:

marsh forest
Montane forest Montane Forest — bois bande-mountain-guatecare train):

mountain mangrove ielfin)
Degraded montane forest Montane Forest — secondary mountain forest
Submontane forest Montane Forest — serrette-bois gris (lower)

Seasonal Montane Forest — pais doux-redwood
Lowland moist forest Evergreen Seasonal Forest — crappo-debasse: crappo-fineleaf-

carat: crappo-fineleaf-cocorite: crappo-blackheart-cocorite:

mora

Semi Evergreen Seasonal Forest — purplehearj-incense-poui:

purpleheart-bois lissette: acurel-moussara-jiggerwood: acurel-

gommier: moussara-figuier
Degraded lowland moist
forest Evergreen Seasonal Forest — secondary evergreen seasonal

forest: secondary mora forest

Semi Evergreen Seasonal Forest — secondary semi evergreen

seasonal forest
Dry forest Dry Evergreen and Deciduous Seasonal formations (excluding

the secondary formation)
Non-forest comprises teak, pine and other plantation crops, agriculture, clear cut sites, fire
bum sites and non-forested areas.

Conservation area boundaries were taken from a 1:L'>0.000 scale map compiled by the
Forestry Division, Ministry of Agriculture Lands and Fisheries. Government of Trinidad and
Tobago: Trinidad — National Parks and Other Protected Areas, which was published in 1980-

150

16 Belize

Country orea 22,960 sq km

Land area 22,800 sq. km

Population (mid- 1 994) 2 million

Population growth rate 3 3 per tent

Population projected to 2025 4 million

Gross notional product per capita (1992) USS22I0

Forest cover for 1992 (see Mop) 18,393 sq. km

Forest cover for 1 990 (FAO, 1 993) 1 9,960 sq. km

Annual deforestation rate (1981-1990) 2 pet ceni

Industrial roundwood production 62,000 tu m

Industrial roundwood exports 1 000 cu m

Fuelwood and cfiorcoal 1 26,000 cu m

Processed wood production 14,000 cu m

Processed wood exports )0,000cu. m

Although physically part of Central America. Belize more closely resembles a Caribbean island in both culture and
economy. For three hundred years, forestry was the mainstay of its economy. However, the highly selective extraction
of only a few valuable species has not radically altered the vegetation and extensive natural forests still remain.
Agriculture is gradually becoming more important, but the very low human population means that there is much less
forest destruction in Belize than in any other country in the region. Increasing economic pressure and a huge influx of
immigrants threaten this state of affairs. There has, however, been a dramatic increase in environmental awareness
within the country and a number of initiatives by both the government and non-governmental organisations aim to
direct Belize's development along a more sustainable pathway.

Introduction

Belize is the second smallest of the Central American countries
but, because it is mostly still covered with relatively undisturbed
vegetation, it retains much of the wildlife that has vanished
from other areas. Formerly British Honduras, the country
became self-governing in 1964 and fully independent of Britain
in 198F

The northern half and the eastern fringe of the southern half
of the country consists of level, low lying plains. The Maya
Mountains, mostly between 300 m and 1000 m in altitude, oc-
cupy the south-centre of Belize. These mountains rise steeply to
a maximum of 1200 m at Doyles Delight in the south-east and
slope down to the Vaca Plateau in the west. North and west of
the Maya Mountains is a hilly or rolling karst landscape. There
are approximately 1100 offshore islands and coral cays, many
of these lying in a chain along the country's spectacular barrier
reef, the second longest in the world.

Mean monthly temperatures range from a minimum of 16'C
to a maximum of 33°C. the cool season is from November to
January. The north of Belize receives about 1500 mm of rain per
year, while in the south precipitation is over 4000 mm in a year.
In the north and centre of the country there is a pronounced dry
season from January to April or May with less than 100 mm of
rain per month. In the south, the dry season is from February to
April. Hurricanes are frequent and can be devastating.

Belize's population has grown by an estimated 30,000 in the
last ten years as a result of an influx of refugees from other
Central American countries. Nevertheless, the country has an
exceptionally low overall population density of less than nine
individuals per sq. km. About half the people live in urban
areas, most on the low-lying coastal region. Around 75 per cent
of the country is virtually uninhabited. The population is
diverse; although predominantly Creole or mestizo, there are
also descendants of the Maya and Caribs, as well as people with

Chinese, East Indian, European and North American ancestry in
the country (Hartshorn et at.. 1984). English is the official lan-
guage, but Spanish is widely and increasingly spoken.

Forestry used to be the mainstay of the country's economy;
although still important, it is in decline. Agriculture and fish-
eries are other leading productive sectors of the economy. Sugar
and citrus fruit are the main agricultural exports. The tourist
industry is increasing and is presently second to agriculture as a
foreign exchange earner.

The Forests

The subtropical moist forests (Holdridge et a!.. 1950) of north-
ern and western Belize are similar to those covering
Guatemala's northern Peten and Mexico's Yucatan Peninsula
(Pennington and Sarukhan, 1968). Characteristic species include
Swietenia macrophylla. Manilkara zapota. Brosimum alicas-
trum. Poiiteria izabalensis. Pimento dioica. Manilkara chicle,
Drypetes brownii. Pseiidolmedia spuria. Dialium guianense,
Calophylliim brasiliense, Orbignya cohiine and Terminalia
ainazonia (Hartshorn et at., 1984).

There are two major areas of Piniis caribaea in Belize: one is
north of the Western Highway and the other is on the lower,
western part of Mountain Pine Ridge. These are included in the
subtropical moist forest zone (Hartshorn et al.. 1984).

At an elevation of 650-700 m, the subtropical moist forests
change floristically to lower montane forests. Qiiercus spp.,
Pinus oocarpa and Podocarpus guatemalensis are representa-
tive species. This forest type is found in the Mountain Pine
Ridge, on higher parts of the Vaca Plateau and along the upper
western slopes of the Maya Mountains. In wetter areas such as
on the high points of Mountain Pine Ridge and the upper wind-
ward ranges of Maya Mountains, Pinus palula predominates.
Other characteristic species are the mountain cabbage palm

151

Belize

Euterpe macrospadix and the tree ferns Alsophila myosuroides
and Hemitelia mtilliflora (Hartshorn et al.. 1984).

The subtropical wet forest zone occurs below about 600 m on
the windward side of the Maya Mountains. Upper .Stann Creek,
the Cockscomb Basin and much of Toledo district also fall into
this zone. Tree species found in the zone include Virolti
koschnyi, Symphonici glohulifera. Schizolohium parahxhum.
Vochysia hondurensis. Simarouba ainaru, Cal(>ph\ llioii
brasiliense and Dalbergia stevensonii.

In southern Toledo district, the wettest area of Belize, the
transitional zone from subtropical to tropical wet forest is found.
Cotton trees Ceiba pentandni can reach a height of 50 m in this
area. Extensive swamp forest is dominated by Pterocarpus
officinalis while Manicarici saccifera dominates the freshwater
palm swamp.

Mangroves

Mangroves fringe most of Belize's coastline. Many cays are
also covered in mangroves or have been colonised on the lagoon
side, principally by the red mangrove Rhizophora mangle. ODA
(1989) estimated the area of mangroves to be 748 sq. km. In
1992. S.A. Zisman of the Forest Planning and Management
Project estimated a very similar area: he reported, in an unpub-
lished paper (Zisman, 1992), that mangroves, including those on
the cays, covered 772 sq. km. The cays are not included in the
figure of 523 sq. km estimated by the Belize Forest Department
( 1993) and shown in Table 16.1. The mangroves shown on Map
16.1, cays included, cover 670 sq. km (Table 16.2).

Forest Resources and Management

The true extent of forest cover in Belize is uncertain. Although
the annual reports of the Forestry Department give a figure for
"forest land", this figure includes all but urban land and that
zoned as "agribusiness"" land. In 1981. the Department regarded
21,322 sq. km or 93.5 per cent of the country's land area as
■■forest land"", but that was obviously an overestimate of actual
forest cover (Hartshorn et al., 1984). FAO (1993) estimates
19,960 sq. km, or 87.5 per cent of the country, to be forested,
but this includes areas with as little as 10 per cent canopy cover
and the survey used as a baseline was from 1979. The figure
given by FAO ( 1993) for closed broadleaved forest in Belize is
18,680 sq. km. However, FAOAJNEP (1981) points out that: //

Table 16.1 Estimates of vegetation cover in Belize

Vegetation Clas.',-

Area Percent Per cent of

(sq. hn) canopy cover land covered

Broadleaf cover
Open broadleaf cover
Mixed broadleaf and pine
Pine woodland
Pine woodland savanna
Pine tree savanna
Marsh/swamp forest
Mangrove forest
Non-forest cover
Agricultural/urban land

Total

* NB This is a different figure for total land area than that noted al the head of thi-s chapter.
Source: BeUze Forest Department ( 199.^),

3.725

>75

469

25-75

378

>75

360

>75

637

50-75

1.227

5-50

553

>75

523

1.536

2,323

!1,731*

100

Table 16.2

.limate

s of forest extent in

Bel

ize

Forest type

Area (sq. km)

9c land area

Lowland'

14.325

62.8

Pine=

1.348

5.9

Swamp'

521

2.3

Mangrove'

670

2.9

Total

16,864

74.0

Includes broadleaf and open broadleaf category from Table 16. 1 but some of this, as noted

above, is low scrubby vegetation rather than true forest.

This is the pine woodland, pine woodland savanna and mixed broadleaf and pine from

Table 16.1 — the pine tree savanna has been mapped as non-forest on the advice of D.

Gray from the Belize Forest Department.
' This is the marsh/swamp foresl from Table 16, 1 .
' This is the mangrove from Table 16, 1 but also includes mangroves on the cays.

Based on analysis of Map 1 6. 1 . See Map Legend on p. 1 59 for details of sources.

is estimated thai there are no virgin forests left in the country,
all having been creamed mainly for mahogany, cedar and pine.

The distribution of the forest types given in Table 16.1 and
shown in a generalised way on Map 16.1 was derived from the
Land System maps of the Land Resources Assessments of King
et al. (1986, 1989, 1992). The land use data come from aerial
photographs and satellite images produced between 1985 and
1988. Belize Forest Department (1993) note that the map they
have produced should be seen only as a first approximation at
estimating the present forest resources of Belize.

The broadleaf cover shown on Map 16.1 is a mixture of a
wide range of forest types, ranging from low scrubby wood-
lands to tall, species-rich forests. Its area, in Table 16.1, was
arrived at by subtracting the area of the other classes from the
land area of Belize. The pine tree savanna, which occurs over
large areas of the coastal plain, consists of scattered pine trees
and clumps of pine distributed amongst extensive grassland.
On the advice of D. Gray, it has been shown as non-forest on
Map 16.1.

Excluding the pine-tree savanna, non-forest and agricul-
tural/urban land. Table 16.1 suggests a forest cover of 16,645
sq. km, i.e. 73 per cent of the country, though this includes
some low scrubby vegetation which would not normally be
included as forest in this atlas.

Measurements taken from Map 16.1 are shown in Table 16.2.
The Map was compiled from a digital data set provided by the
Belize Forest Department so the areas of the different forest
types measured from it are very similar to those in Table 16.1.
The total forest area shown on Map 16.1 is 16.864 .sq. km, a 74
per cent forest cover. It must be reiterated that Belize's Forest
Department regard their figures as indicative only, but, what-
ever the true forest area, it is clear that Belize has a considerably
higher percentage of its land under forest than does any other
Central American country.

The largest single block of intact broadleaved forest extends
over the remote, steep, terrain of the Maya Mountains. Of the 1 1
per cent of the country covered with some natural pine vegeta-
tion (Table 16.1). only two per cent (the pine woodland) is
closed forest (Belize Forest Department, 1993). The pine tree
savannas consist of scattered pine trees and clumps of pine dis-
tributed amongst extensive grassland. This formation occurs
over large areas of the coastal plain.

Neil Bird, of the Belize Forest Planning and Management

152

Belize

Project, reports that there are 16 forest reserves in the country
covering an area of 4487 sq. km or about 20 per cent of the
country's land area. These reserves contain about 73 per cent
and 25 per cent of the country's pine woodland and broadleaf
category forests respectively (Belize Forest Department. 1993).
Management of the reserves is based upon the principle of mul-
tiple use, allowing sustainable use of forest products but ensur-
ing values such as watershed protection and wildlife conserva-
tion. The Belize Forest Department (1993) has calculated the
area of land in Belize with a potential for timber extraction to be
I 1.501 sq. km; most of this is outside the Forest Reserves
(Table 16.3). Those areas unavailable for timber production are
either protection forest or are considered inaccessible (ODA,
1989). There are also some privately-held forests and there is
little information available on these.

As can be seen from Table 16.3, 72 per cent of the
exploitable pine woodland are within forest reserves, whereas
only 1 1 per cent of the exploitable broadleaf forests are within
these reserves. About one fifth of this area is regarded by the
Forest Department to be protection forest and a greater area is
considered "inaccessible" and therefore unusable for timber
production (ODA, 1989). Most of the exploitable pine wood-
land is within Mountain Pine Ridge Forest Reserve. If managed
sustainably, this would be sufficient to guarantee the long-term
domestic supply of softw ood.

Belize's geopolitical identity is directly related to its forest
resources. The country was declared the Crown Colony of
British Honduras in 1862. Its settlers were principally interested
in exploiting logwood Haematoxylon campechianum for dye.
Exploitation of the species continued at a reduced level until
early this century, although it was gradually superseded as
Belize's principal export by mahogany Swietenia macrophylla.

Output of forest products was initially predominantly in
the form of logs for export; this declined rapidly from 1950
and had almost ceased by 1970. Production of mahogany and
pine sawnwood expanded until the mid-1950s. Most trees
were cut in repeated cycles of selective logging, with only the
larger individuals of a few commercially sought-after species
being taken.

The majority of logging is now carried out by private conces-
sionaires. Most forest permits and licences are issued for one
year at a time with an option for renewal if performance is satis-
factory. However, some licences can be issued for as long as 10
years. There are 1940 sq. km of private forest land and an esti-
mated 2500 sq. km of Crown land under licence (ODA. 1989).

Although there are 46 sawmills in the country, some 75 per
cent of the country's lumber production comes from only five or
six mills (ODA, 1989). In 1986-87. three species, mahogany,
pine and cedar Cedrela odorata accounted for 58 per cent of
sawnwood production. Production of cedar and mahogany has
declined considerably this century. In 1928-29. 2.5 million cu.
feet were harvested each year, but between 1983 and 1987 only
350,000 cu. feet were cut annually. It is, however, estimated
that even the much lower levels of pine and hardwood now
being cut cannot be sustained with the present management and
harvesting systems.

Plantation forestry began over 45 years ago, but only a very
small area of plantations exists today, Piniis caribaea is planted
most commonly, but teak Tectona grandis, Gmelina aihorea
and Swielenia macrophylla are also used.

A number of non-timber forest products are harvested in the
wild on a commercial basis. Up to the middle of this century or
thereabouts, the production of chicle from sapodilla trees

Table 16.3

extraction

The amount of land in Belize with potential for timber

gelation Class

Extent

Areas

Total

inside FRs

outside FRs

Area

sq. km

per
cent

sq. km

per
cent

sq. km

Broadleaf

990

7.864

8.854

Open broadleaf

460

470

Mixed Bl & pine

107

138

Pine woodland

254

352

Pine woodland savanna 105

485

590

Pine tree savanna

269

828

1.097

Marsh/swamp

Mangrove

Non-forest

Total

1.659

9,842

11.501

Manilkara zapota was one of the country's main forest indus-
tries, but competition from synthetic gums has meant that there
is now only a small vestigial trade in this product. Recent
Japanese interest in chicle may, however, revive the trade.
Seeds from Finns caribaea are collected and exported by the
Forest Department. Allspice from Pinienta officinalis is ex-
ported to Europe and used locally.

Responsibility for most aspects of forestry and conservation
rests with the Forest Department in the Ministry of Natural
Resources. Belize now has comprehensive laws regulating activ-
ities that have an impact on the environment. New legislation
that has been passed includes laws to protect wildlife, establish
national parks and reserves, regulate the use of land, control pes-
ticides and ensure that the extraction of minerals and petroleum
is done in an environmentally sensitive manner. However, there
are still weaknesses in the application of the laws.

Deforestation

There was comparatively widespread deforestation in Belize
when the Maya civilization was at its peak over 1000 years ago
and extensive areas of the country were farmed. The decline of
the Maya led to the abandonment of much of the fanned land,
allowing the vegetation to regenerate so that the forest is now
widely found as a climax formation (ODA. 1989).

In spite of the long history of logging, it is only in areas of
traditional slash and burn agriculture (southern Toledo and
western Cayo districts) and in the northern sugar cane region
that the country has suffered significant deforestation
(Hartshorn et al. 1984). Nevertheless, the large influx of
refugees, mainly from Guatemala, in the 1980s, and the conse-
quent rise in the number of small farmers, has been a major
cause of the recent increase in deforestation. FAO (1993) esti-
mates average deforestation between the years of 1981 and
1990 to be only 50 sq. km per year, a rate of 0.2 per cent.

The boom in the citrus industry has meant that in the four
years between 1986 and 1990, the land under cultivation for cit-
rus fruit more than doubled from around 75 sq. km to 162 sq.
km. Most of this is in Stan Creek district (BNF, 1992).
Howe\er, an lUCN study showed that this clearing for citrus
caused comparatively little deforestation and that the benefits
from increased employment and general prosperity probably
outweigh the environmental costs of the industry.

153

Belize

154

Belize

155

Belize

Columbia River forest, Belize.

(WWF/Tony Rath)

There are two bird species listed as threatened in Belize by
Collar et al. (1992): the yellow-headed Amazon Amazona ora-
trix and the keel-billed motmot Electron carinatum. The
Amazon lives in a variety of habitats including humid forest,
but the motmot is confined to moist forest. Habitat destruction
is one of the causes of the decline in both species.

Forest mammals listed as threatened by lUCN
(Groombridge. 1993) that occur in Belize are the howler mon-
key Alouatta pigra, the spider monkey Ateles geoffroyi, the tapir
Tapirus bairdii. the margay Leopardus wieldii and the olingo
Bassarisciis siimichrasti.

Conservation Areas

Provision for the gazettement and management of conservation
areas lies within the National Parks System Act of 1981. which
is administered by the Ministry of Natural Resources. Wildlife
sanctuaries are no-hunting zones that are set aside to preserve
important habitats or migration stop-over sites. National parks
and monuments are for the enjoyment of the people of Belize
and are open to the public. Nature reserves are set aside for sci-
entific research.

The government does not have the resources to manage or
protect its system of national parks adequately. However, it con-
Table 16.4 Conservation Areas in Belize

Existing conservation areas in lUCN's categories I-IV are listed
below. Marine reserves have been excluded. Private reserves and for-
est reserves (category VIII) are shown on Figure 16.1.

In recent years, several thousand hectares of land have been
transferred out of reserved forests including some from
Columbia River Forest Reserve for shifting agriculture (ODA.
1989).

Biodiversity

Although a small country, Belize has a high diversity of plant
and animal life. Since much of its habitat is relatively undis-
turbed at present, the populations of many species are more sta-
ble here than in other countries. The flora is estimated to include
about 4000 species of flowering plants, with 700 tree species,
but there are few endemics (Hartshorn et al.. 1984). There are
135 species of mammals. 513 bird species, 107 reptiles and 32
amphibians (N. Bird. pers. comm.). The country's spectacular
barrier reef is the second longest in the world and has been
nominated for listing under the World Heritage Convention.

Two crocodile species are threatened in Belize. Crocodyhis
acutiis and C. moreletii, though only the former is listed as
globally threatened by lUCN (Groombridge. 1993). C. aciitus is
widely distributed along the coastline and the latter, which is
rarer, is found in inland lagoons and rivers, including in the
upper streams of the Maya Mountains (Hartshorn et al.. 1984).
The threatened Central American river turtle Dermatemys
mawii is comparatively common in Belize. It is. however,
hunted for food everywhere it occurs.

National Park

Area (sq.km)

Aquas Turbias*

Blue Hole*

Chiquibul*~

1029

Guanacaste

0.2

Fives Blue Lake*

Laughing Bird Caye*

O.I

National Monument

Half Moon Caye+

Wildlife Sanctuary

Crooked Tree*

174

Cockscomb Basin*

402

Monkey Bay*

Paynes Creek*

123

Temash-Sarstoon*

170

Nature Reserve

Bladen*

402

Burdon Canal

Society Hall*

Private Reserx'e

Shipstem*

Total

2477.3

* areas with forest (including mangroves) within their boundanes according to Map 16.1
~ Includes Caracol Archaeological Reserve of 18 sq, km
+ Not mapped — data not available to this project.

Source: D. Gray for sizes and designations (in litt.. 1993) WCMC for lUCN's categories
(unpublished data)

156

Belize

tracts the Belize Audubon Society (BAS), a private NGO, to
provide management plans and train park wardens. BAS has
access to domestic and international funding sources that the
government does not, so this relationship works quite well.

As well as the protected areas with lUCN's categories I-IV
listed in Table 16.4, there are also three other privately held
reserves in the country (Figure 16.1). The Community Baboon
Sanctuary was established in 1985 to protect one of the few
healthy black howler monkey Alouatta villosa populations in
Central America. Landowners from eight villages included in the
area contribute to the maintenance of the sanctuary which now
covers 53 sq. km. Rio Bravo Conservation and Management
Area (926 sq. km), is being managed to integrate forestry and
conservation by the Programme for Belize (see Box). There is
also a 4 sq. km reserve at Monkey Bay (separate from the
wildlife sanctuary). Shipstern is the only private reserve in
Belize listed in lUCN's categories I-IV; it is a category IV
reserve. It is being run along the same lines as Rio Bravo and is
also being used as a production area for butterflies for export.

The 16 forest reserves, most in the south of Belize (see
Figure 16.1), are managed for multiple use. Sustainable extrac-
tion of forest products and tourist recreation are permitted
where these are consistent with protection of wildlife and envi-
ronmental values. These reserves cover a total area of 4487 sq.
km (N. Bird, in litt).

Figure 16.1 Private reserves and forest reserves of Belize
Source: unpublished data held at WCMC

Forest Rfiserves
Privalc Rfseives
Waier Bodies

A boat-billed heron Cochlearius cochlearius on nest with young
in Cockscomb Basin Wildlife Sanctuary. (WWF/Tony Rath)

Conservation Initiatives

A comprehensive land-use study, funded by the Overseas
Development Administration of the UK, is nearly complete.
This will provide Belize's government with information which
will enable it to zone agricultural and infrastructural develop-
ment so as to minimise environmental risks.

International and local NGOs working in conservation
have a high profile in Belize. The Belize Audubon Society is
involved with environmental education, conservation of
wildlife and, as mentioned above, in the financing, develop-
ment and management of protected areas. The overall goal of
the Programme for Belize is to assist in the conservation and
economic development of the natural resources of the coun-
try. The Nature Conservancy assisted with the purchase of
Rio Bravo.

The Nature Conservancy of the US and the NGO CARE
International include Belize in their regional "Proyecto
Ambiental para Centro America". This is a project to promote
conservation and sustainable use of resources in Central
America. The main emphasis in Belize is on the district of
Toledo in the south of the country.

157

Belize

Programme for Belize and the Rio Bravo Conservation and Management Area

In the late 1980s, some 2830 sq. km of land in north-western
Belize came on the open market after the break-up of a much
larger holding. The land, mostly covered with sub-tropical
moist forest, but also with significant tracts of wetland and
pine-oak savanna, had been selectively logged (mainly for
Cedrela and Swielenia) for well over a century. Nonetheless
it was still in excellent condition, containing healthy popula-
tions of a wide range of species that were becoming rare in
Central America. In addition, although no indigenous people
had lived in the area since the mid- 19th century, ancient
Mayan settlements were common.

As it was feared that the area would be totally cleared for
agriculture. Programme for Belize (PFB) was set up with the
express purpose of acquiring as much of the land as possible
for conservation purposes. PFB is a Belizean controlled, non-
profit making company which is dedicated to promoting wise
use of the nation's natural resources. Around 445 sq. km of
land were purchased with funding from foundations, bilateral
aid agencies, commercial sponsors and — through a sponsor-
ship scheme for purchase and endowment of individual plots
— from private donors including schools. A further 370 sq.
km were subsequently donated by Coca-Cola Inc. after the
company abandoned its original plan for a large-scale citrus
plantation on the land. Additional land purchases means that,
as of September 1993, PFB controlled a total of slightly over
926 sq. km (Programme for Belize, 1993).

This area constitutes the Rio Bravo Conservation and
Management Area (RBCMA), where Programme for Belize
demonstrates the practical application of its principles. The
ultimate objective is to achieve financial self-sufficiency for
conservation management of Rio Bravo through revenues
generated by wise use of its natural resources. In doing so,
PFB will also show that retention of forest is a viable eco-
nomic use of the land. Meanwhile, although several (20-30)
thousand hectares, mostly owned by Mennonites. has since
been turned over to intensive agriculture, much of the origi-
nal holding remains under forest cover and the PFB main-
tains its policy of purchasing such land as it can when it
comes onto the market. The RBCMA already has a shared
boundary with the Guatemalan Rio Azul National Park and it
is hoped that it may ultimately form the Belizean portion of a
tri-national conservation area in the northern Peten/southem
Yucatan area.

As of 1993. Programme for Belize has completed prelimi-
nary management, land-use and action plans. It is now
emphasising development of land management activity,
based on a provisional zoning system, whilst refining its
planning approach for the post- 1995 period. It has a fully-
functioning research station, and long-term programmes for
pure and applied ecological research, archaeological work,
environmental monitoring and survey work are in place.
There is also beginning to be effective control over the illegal
resource theft, looting of Mayan sites and hunting that have
long taken place in this border zone. An education and out-
reach programme is operating and subsidised visits by local
groups are rapidly increasing. PFB also runs a professional
training scheme, giving a year of practical work experience
to Belizeans contemplating a career in natural resource man-
agement.

At present, educational tourism is the sole revenue-earn-
ing activity established on the RBCMA, but this already pro-
vides some 20 per cent of annual financial requirements.
Other means of raising money are planned. The provisional
zoning system allows for harvesting of non-timber forest
products over the wide area buffering RBCMA' s central core
and trials for chicle-tapping and production of honey, essen-
tial oils, resins, logwood dyes and other products are cur-
rently being devised. Zoning on the lands donated by Coca-
Cola allow for harvest of the timber, therefore the potential
for sustainable forestry is being investigated; this is subject to
the production of an appropriate forestry plan and the results
of an independent environmental impact assessment. PFB's
remit also allows for experimental agricultural and agro-
forestry activities, but these have not been developed as yet.

The combination of conservation and economic develop-
ment and the determination to achieve self-sufficiency, the
last within a specific and limited time-frame and within the
constraints set by wise-use, are important features of
Programme for Belize and its work on the Rio Bravo Area.
Perhaps the most important feature, however, is the demon-
stration that a local NGO, by making judicious use of the full
range of support mechanisms available to it, can develop its
own approach to sustainable natural resource management on
an ambitious scale.

Source: John Burton. Programme for Belize

References

Belize Forest Department (1993). The Forests of Belize: a first

approximation at estimating the country 's forest resources.

10 pp. Unpublished.
BNF (1992). Belize National Report. Presented to the UN

Conference on Environment and Development. Rio de

Janerio, Brazil.
Collar, N.J., Gonzaga, L.P., Krabbe. N., Madrofio Nieto, A.,

Naranjo. L.G., Parker III, T.A. and Wege, D.C. (1992).

Threatened Birds of the Americas. The ICBP/IUCN Red Data

Book. ICBP. Cambridge, U.K. 1 150 pp.
FAO/UNEP (1981). Proyecto de Evaluacion de los Recursos

Forestales Tropicales: Los Recursos Forestales de la

America Tropical. FAO, Rome, Italy.

FAO (1993). Forest resources assessment 1990: Tropical coun-
tries. FAO Forestry paper 1 12. FAO, Rome, Italy.

Groombridge, B. (Ed.) ( 1993). 1994 lUCN Red List of
Threatened Animals. lUCN, Gland. Switzerland and
Cambridge, U.K. 286 pp.

Hartshorn, G.. Nicolait, L., Hartshorn, L., Bevier, G.,
Brightman, R., Cal. J., Cawich, A., Davidson, 'W., DuBois,
R.. Dyer, C Gibson. J., Hawley, W.. Leonard, J., Nicolait.
R.. "Weyer. D.. 'White. H. and Wright, C. (1984). Belize
Country Environmental Profile: A Country Study. LISAID
Contract No. 505-0000-C-00-3001-00. 150 pp.

Holdridge. L.R.. Lamb. F.B. and Mason, B. ( 1950). Los Basques
de Guatemala. IICA/Inst. Fom. Prod, Guatemala. 249 pp.

158

Belize

King . R.B.. Baillie, I.C., Bissett. P.G.. Grimble. R.J., Johnson,

M.S. and Silva, G.L. (1986). Laud Resource Survey of

Toledo District, Belize. Tolworlh Land Resources

Development Centre, ODA. Pp. 65.
King , R.B., Baillie, LC, Dunsmore. J.R., Grimble, R.J.,

Johnson, M.S. and Wright, A.C.S. (1989). Land Resource

Assessment of Stann Creek District, Belize. Natural

Resources Institute, Bulletin 19. ODA, Chatam. Pp. 262.
King . R.B., Baillie, LC, Abell, T.M.B., Dunsmore. J.R., Gray,

D.A.. Pratt, J.H., Versey, H.R., Wright, A.C.S. and Zisman,

S.A. (1992). Lin}d Resource Assessment of Northern Belize.

Natural Resources Institute, Bulletin 43. Volumes I and 11.

ODA. Chatam. Pp. 174 and 513.
ODA (1989). Belize Tropical Forestry Action Plan. Overseas

Development Administration, London.
Pennington. T.D. and Sarukhan. J. (1968). Arboles Tropicales

de Mexico. INAF/FAO, Mexico. 413 pp.
Programme for Belize (1993). Going forward in Belize — the

new river wildlife corridor. Programme for Belize Newsletter

9: 1.
Zisman, S.A. ( 1992). Mangroves in Belize: their characteristics,

use and conservation. Unpublished report for the Forest

Planning and Management Project.

Author: Caroline Harcourt. WCMC. Cambridge with contribu-
tions from Neil Bird and David Gray of the Belize Forest
Planning and Management Project, John Palmer of CIFOR
and John Burton. Programme for Belize.

Map 16.1 Belize

Forest cover data for Belize was made available to WCMC by the Land Information Centre
(LIC) of the Ministry of Natural Resources. Belmopan. David Gray, of LIC. kindly provided a
digital dataset of forests at a scale of 1:500.000, harmonised into simplified broad forest cate-
gories to facilitate use in this Atlas. The distribution of each forest type in the LIC dataset was
derived from land system maps of the Land Resource Assessments compiled by Bruce King er
ai (1986. 1989 and 1992) of the Natural Resources Institute (NRI), UK- It must be noted, how-
ever, that because the forest cover has been estimated from the NRI Land Systems survey (i.e.
the extent of each forest type was estimated by extracting land known to be under cultivation
from 1985-1989), this map should be seen only as a first approximation at measuring the forest
resources of Belize.

Mangrove cover for the outlying cays has been added from a supplementary file provided by
the Land Information Centre, and is based on Zisman. S. (1992) Mangroves in Belize: their
characieristtcs. use and conservation, an unpublished report for the Forest Planning and
Management Project.

The NRI land system units, mapped to show agricultural potential of Belize, were assigned to
the following forest classification: broadleaf cover (>15% tree canopy cover): open broadleaf
cover (25%-75%); mixed broadleaf and pine (>75%); pine woodland (>75%); pine woodland
savanna (50%-75%); pine tree savanna (5%-50%); marsh/swamp forest (>75%); mangrove
l>5'7c) and non-forest cover (<5%). Canopy cover was determined by interpreting a sample of
1 :40,000 scale aerial photographs, however determination was indicative only. It is important to
note that the broadleaf category is very generalised. This class is a mixture of a wide range of
forest types ranging from low scrubby woodlands to tall species-rich forests. The match
between land system units and forest types varied, with good correlations for pine forests,
marsh/swamp forest and non-forest. However, because the broadleaf classification is so general,
the only way the extent of this class could be derived was by subtracting the area of all the other
classes from the total area of Belize. This inevitably will have introduced inaccuracies.

The following forest classes have been amalgamated into the broad forest types shown on
Map 16.1. Lowland rain forest — Broadleaf forest and Open broadleaf forest: pine forest —
Pine woodland. Pine woodland savanna and Mixed broadleaf/pine forest: inland swamp forest
— Marsli/swamp: mangrove — Mangrove: and non-forest — Pine tree savanna and Non-
foresl.

A map compiled at a 1 :350,O00 scale by the Belize Centre for Environmental Studies, Belize
City, Belize — Protected Lands of Belize ( 1 992), was used to portray the protected areas.

159

17 Costa Rica

Country area 51, 100 sq km

,-. "•,

Land area 51,060 sq. km

Population (mid-1994) 3 2 million

Population growth rote 2 3 per cent

Population projected to 2025 5 4 million

Gross national product per capita (1 992) USS2000

Forest cover for 1 988 (see Mop) 1 5,049 sq, km

Forest cover for 1 990 (FAO, 1 993) 1 4,280 sq km

Annual deforestation rate (1981-1990) 2 9 pet cent

Industrial roundwood production 1 ,1 70,000 cu. m

"fij.

Industrial roundwood exports —

_ ••

Fuelwood and charcoal production 3, 1 36,000 cu m

Processed wood production 462,000 (u, m
Processed wood exports 28,000 cu. m

Within a period of only 50 years. Costa Rica has reduced its forest cover from 80 per cent of the total territory to less
than 30 per cent. Since 1950. the area deforested each year has exceeded 500 sq. km. The main cause of the deforesta-
tion is the conversion of forest to pasture for raising beef cattle. Most of the remaining forests are in the country's
extensive protected areas system; all other forests are likely to be cleared before the end of this century.

The critical situation of the forests has become a subject of considerable public concern. As a result, in 1984 a law
was passed to make it illegal to cut down forest on land that is unsuitable for agriculture. In addition, the national parks
system is currently being reorganized and a National Institute for Biodiversity has been established. This institute aims
to encourage the conservation, management and appropriate use of biodiversity in the country. However, despite these
changes, Costa Rica's forests are still shrinking every year.

Introduction

Costa Rica is the third smallest Central American country,
extending only 460 km or so at its greatest length, with as little
as 118 km between coasts. The flat, open, 210 km stretch of
Caribbean coast contrasts sharply with the irregular and hilly
Pacific coast, which is some 1016 km long. Geographically the
country can be divided into three distinct regions: the Pacific
coast, a central mountainous backbone and the Caribbean low-
lands.

The Pacific coast consists mainly of steep cliffs with occa-
sional narrow beaches. The two major coastal peninsulas.
Nicoya to the north and Osa to the south, are mostly rugged
hills with small fringing plains; they are sparsely populated.
The highest points on these peninsulas are Cerro Azul at 1018 m
on Nicoya peninsula and Cerro Tigre at 782 m on Osa peninsula.
The mountain chain in the interior is divided into four ranges
which include several volcanoes, some of which are still active.
Indeed, volcanic activity is a frequent cause of deaths, dis-
placement and economic disruption in the country. The highest
peak, in the Cordillera de Talamanca, is Chirripo Grande at
3810 m. The capital city of San Jose is situated in the agricul-
turally productive upland basin of Valle Central in the highland
area. The Caribbean lowlands, below 500 m elevation, make up
about one fifth of the country. The land is mostly flat with scat-
tered hills. This area has always been inaccessible and sparsely
populated. However, the Tortuguero waterway now provides
access to the northern coastal area and a road has been built to
the border with Panama. Puerto Limon remains the only port
on the Caribbean coast and it is the site of the largest eastern
settlement.

Although entirely within the tropics, Costa Rica possesses
great climatic diversity with extreme regional differences.

Average annual rainfall is ,3300 mm, but it varies considerably
throughout the country. The length of the rainy season also
varies, from all year round in the Caribbean lowlands to six
months (May to October) in regions of Guanacaste Province on
the Pacific coast. Mean annual maximum and minimum temper-
atures in San Jose (at 1 172 m) are 26°C and 15°C respectively.
Temperatures in the Caribbean lowlands tend to be lower than
those on the Pacific coast. For instance. Siquirres at around 100 m
elevation on the east coast has a mean annual temperature of
24.7°C, while Esparta at the higher elevation of 208 m on the
Pacific coast has a mean annual temperature of 26.5°C.

The Costa Rican people are strikingly homogenous and gen-
erally tolerant of the few minorities within the nation. Most
Costa Ricans claim European, particularly Spanish, ancestry. Of
this group a small portion are ""mestizo", that is of mixed
Spanish and Indian blood. There are also some Afro-americans
on the Caribbean coast, descendants of immigrants or slaves.
The indigenous Amerindians now make up less than 0.5 per
cent of the population.

Costa Rica's population growth rate has slowed from over
3.6 per cent in the early 1960s to 2.3 per cent in 1994. The pop-
ulation has nevertheless increased significantly, rising from
862,000 in 1950 to over 3 million at present. A considerable
number of these people, more than 10 per cent, are refugees
from political conflict in Guatemala, Nicaragua and El
Salvador. Overall population density is around 63 inhabitants
per sq. km, but the majority of the people live in the highland
Valle Central. Around 45 per cent of Costa Ricans are urban
dwellers.

The amount of land devoted to agriculture has risen consider-
ably in the past four decades with a consequent decrease in for-

160

Costa Rica

Table 17.1 Land use in Costa Rica in 1984

Uind Use

Pasture
Forest

Permanent crops
Annual crops
Other natural veg.
Urban areas
Lakes and reservoirs
Others

Total

Areci (sq. km)

22.290

16,385

3.150

2.102

5.949

266

163

452

50.757*

Percent ofcoiiiiliy

43.9
32.3

6.2

4.1
11.7

0.5

0.3

0.9

100

* NB This IS a slighlly lower total land area than given al the head of the chapter
Stmrce: MIRENEM/PAFCR (1990)

est cover. Table 17.1 shows land use in Costa Rica in 1984.
Major agricultural exports from the country are coffee and
bananas followed by beef and sugar. Beef production occupies a
disproportionately large share of agricultural land (Leonard,
1987). Costa Rican society is regarded as the most equitable in
(he region, nevertheless access to land and resources is very
unequal with 36 per cent of the land in large farms of over 5 sq.
km and these are held by only one per cent of the landowners
(Leonard. 1987).

The Fore.sts

Different systems have been used in Costa Rica for the ecologi-
cal classification of vegetation (e.g Tosi. 1969; Gomez. 1986).
The most widely used is the system of "Life Zones" described
by Holdridge et al. ( 1971 ). which is based on land form and cli-
mate. The system divides the forest types dealt with in this Atlas
into tropical lowland, tropical premontane, lower montane and
tropical montane. Each category is further sub-divided into
moist, wet and rain forest types. In addition, mangroves and
tropical dry forests exist in closed formations.

Tropical moist forest is the most widespread, but also the
most discontinuous. Life Zone in Costa Rica (Holdridge et al.,
1971). It is found in large areas of the north, east and southeast.
The forest is composed of tall (40 to 50 meters), semideciduous
or evergreen trees, with wide crowns and slender unbranched
boles (mostly less than 100 cm dbh). There are also understorey
trees 15-18 m high and a moderately den.se undergrowth of 1-3 m
high shrubs. Typical tree species include Anacardiuin excelsum.
Brosimwn spp.. Liiehea seemannii, Cordia alliodora. Castilloa
spp.. Virola spp., Giiarea spp.. Calophylliim brasilien.se.
Terminalia ainazonia, Dialium giiianense, Tal)ebuia
pentaphylla. Ochroma lagopus. Minquartia guianen.sis.
Coumarouna panamensis. Vitex spp. and Eschweilera calycula-
la. Palms, especially Scheelea rostrata. are usually abundant.

Holdridge's tropical wet forest is most extensive in the high
rainfall areas of the Sarapiqui and Tortuguero plains in the
northeast and in the Golfo Dulce lowlands in the southwest. The
forest is multistoried and evergreen, the canopy is 45 to 55
meters high, while understorey trees are 10-25 m tall and the
shrub layer is only 1.5-2.5 m. Overall, the trees are taller and
denser than those in the moist forests and they include numer-
ous stilt-rooted palms. It is the most species rich of the Life
Zones with as many as 100 tree species in a single hectare.

The vegetation in Holdridge's tropical premontane moist for-
est zone in the centre of the country has mostly been destroyed
and replaced with coffee bushes. It is a two-layered semidecidu-

ous forest with a canopy at about 25 m and an understorey of
evergreen trees 10-20 m tall. Typical species included Persea
caerulea. Plioebe mexicana. Erblichia odorala and Albizzia
adinocephalu.

The tropical premontane wet forest occurs on the lower
slopes of the El General Valley, in the Turrialba area and in a
broad arc on the lower slopes of the Valle Central, extending
in a narrow band along the Pacific flank of the Tilaran and
Guanacaste Cordilleras. The forest is semi-evergreen with a
canopy 30 — 10 m high, understorey trees are 10-20 m high and
there is a dense undergrowth 2-3 m tall. Various species of the
family Lauraceae characterise the forests, while Talauma glo-
riensis and Lafoensia spp. and Maiiria spp. are also common.

The evergreen tropical premontane rain forest occurs mainly
along the Atlantic slopes of the Talamanca, Central and Tilaran
Cordilleras. Canopy trees are mostly 30-40 m high and the sub-
canopy is dense, with trees 15-25 m tall. Palms are common in
well-drained situations. Epiphytes, woody vines and herbaceous
climbers are very abundant.

Lower montane moist forest occurs in only small areas of the
country: north and southwest of Cartago and around the town of
Zacero. It is an open evergreen forest. Canopy trees are mostly
Querciis. 30-35 m high. The lower montane wet forest occurs
chiefly on the Cordillera de Talamanca. It is primarily an ever-
green oak forest with Querciis oocarpa at lower elevations,
Q. copevensis in the upper elevations and Q. tomenrocaiilis.
Cornus disciflora. Cedrela tonduzii. Almis joriillensis and
Magnolia poasana also occur. Tropical lower montane rain for-
est occurs extensively on the windward flanks of the Central
Cordillera, both flanks of the Talamanca Cordillera, the top of
the Tilaran Cordillera and around the volcanic summits in the
Guanacaste Cordillera. It too is an evergreen forest with
Querciis species occurring commonly and these may reach 50 m
although the general canopy height is only 25-30 m tall.

Tropical montane wet forest is restricted to the summit and
upper southwest slopes of Irazii volcano but most of the vege-
tation here was destroyed by the volcanic eruptions of
1963-65. It would have been an evergreen forest with the
canopy dominated by Querciis species. Tropical montane rain
forest is found in the high Talamancas and occurs as small out-
liers around the summits of Turrialba, Irazii, Barba and Poas
volcanoes. Rains, heavy mists and low cloud cover occur daily
in these areas and there is no dry season. Trees are 25-30 m
tall with small, often open crowns. Epiphytes are abundant and
there is a dense shrub layer. Only 12 or 13 tree species occur
including Buddleia alpina. Escallonia poasana, Oreopanax
xalapense, Weininannia pinnata, Quercus coslaricensis and
Podocarpus standteyi.

Dry tropical forest once covered extensive areas in the north-
em Pacific coastal plain. Most has now been cleared for agricul-
ture but some remnant areas in the Guanacaste National Park
have become the focus for a major international conservation
programme (Janzen. 1986). The forest is semi-deciduous with a
canopy at 20-30 m. an understorey of trees 10-20 m high and a
2-5 m tall, dense shrublayer. Common trees include
Bombacopsis quinatum. Casearia arguta. Clioinelia spinosa.
Eugenia salamensis. Piper amalago and Zanlho.xyliim setulo-
siini (Hartshorn. 1983).

Mangroves

Costa Rica's mangroves are found mostly along the Pacific
coast of Costa Rica, where they occupy 35 per cent of the shore-
line (WRI, 1991). In the Gulf of Nicoya, they cover 152 sq. km

161

Costa Rica

162

Costa Rica

163

Costa Rica

Table 17.2 Estimates of forest extent in Costa Rica

rest type

Area (sq. km)

% land area

Lowland moist

10,306

20.2

Submontane

3,176

6.2

Montane

1.037

2.0

Dry

120

0.2

Mangrove

530

1.0

Total

15.169

29.7

Based on analysis of Map 1 7. 1 . See Map Legend on p, 1 70 for details of sources.

(WRI. 1991) and are also found in the estuaries of the Ri'o
Grande de Terraba and the Ri'o Sierpe and to the east of Quepos
(Leonard. 1987). In 1981. FAO/UNEP reported that mangroves
on the Caribbean coast occurred on Rio Chirripo and in a small
area north of Puerto Limon.

FAOAJNEP (1981 ) estimated that 390 sq. km of mangroves
were present in the country in 1981, while a decade later WRI
(1991) reported an area of 400 sq. km. The area given by
Jimenez ( 1992) is 413.3 sq. km. The 530 sq. km of mangroves
(Table 17.2) indicated on Map 17.1 were digitised from hand
drawn additions to the source map (see Map Legend) and conse-
quently may not be an accurate representation.

Leonard (1987) reported that even as early as 1979, at least
40 per cent of the country's original mangrove area had been
cleared. The clearance is for the construction of shrimp ponds,
salt pans and coastal development. In addition, mangroves have
been degraded by the over-collecting of their bark for the tan-
ning industry. The harvesting of the bark of red mangroves
Rhizophora has now been made illegal.

Forest Resources and Management

Costa Rica's original vegetation was virtually all forest: the
exceptions were the fresh-water marshes and the sub-alpine
paramo on the highest mountains (Holdridge. 1967). Before the
Spanish arrived, the forest was broken by only a few dispersed
Indian settlements and even as late as 1900, forest dominated
over 90 per cent of the land (WRI, 1 99 1 ). However, since 1 922,
deforestation has increased exponentially (WRI, 1991 ).

According to Garita (1989). forest covered only 14,760 sq.
km in 1989, which is less than 29 per cent of the country. Of
this, 9726 sq. km were in protected areas and 2350 sq. km
received some protection in buffer zones. That left only 2684
sq. km, merely 5.3 per cent of the national territory, available
for production forests. This area, at present covered by natural
commercial forests, will be depleted before the end of the cen-
tury. It is estimated that Costa Rica will then need to import
wood, with an annual cost of approximately US$375 millions
(WRI, 1991). FAO (1993) estimated that 14,280 sq. km of for-
est remained in the country in 1990, this was distributed
between the tropical rain forest and hill and montane zones.
Table 17.2 gives the area of each forest types as shown on Map
17.1. The differences between the estimates of FAO (1990 for-
est cover), Garita (1989 forest cover) and Table 17.2 ( 1988 for-
est cover), can probably be accounted for by the very high an-
nual deforestation rate of 500 sq. km (but see the section on
deforestation below).

The Directorate General of Forests (Direccion General
Forestal-DGF) is responsible for forest management. Since
1986, DGF has fallen under the Ministry of Natural Resources,

Energy and Mines (MIRENEM — Ministerio de Recursos
Naturales. Energi'a y Minas). According to the Forestry Law
(Law No. 7174 of 1990) all harvesting operations should be reg-
ulated through a forest permit. These are issued by DGF, which
also regulates timber through transportation permits and
requires the timber owner to pay a forestry tax as well as munic-
ipal ta.xes. The dimensions of the trees that can be harvested
from natural forests are legally restricted; they have to be more
than 60 cm dbh in the Atlantic and northern regions of the coun-
try and over 80 cm dbh in the southern region (Lutz et al..
1993). Permits for the main categories of exploitation require a
forest inventory and a management plan prepared by a profes-
sional. However the management plans tend to have limited
technical foundation; instead they are essentially "plans for cut-
ting" (Lutz et al.. 1993). Cutting of more than the authorized
volume appears to be quite common and this illegal logging is
hard to detect (Lutz et al.. 1993).

A survey by Lutz et al. ( 1993) found that less than 20 per cent
of the species from primary tropical forests were used by the
internal timber market and that prices were low for species that
are unknown or have little structural resistance. The most ex-
ploited species were found to be caobilla Carapa giiiane.sis. laurel
Cordia alliodora and lechosa Bro.simun spp. in the Atlantic zone;
caobilla and cedro Cedrela odorata in the northern region; and
caobilla and Cristobal Platymiscium polystachyion in the southern
region of Costa Rica (Lutz et al.. 1993).

In recent years, forest laws have been amended to encourage
greater private sector activity in forestry. There are now more
than 175 public, private and non-governmental organisations
engaged in different aspects of forestry or forest conservation.
Many are still quite weak but some reforestation companies,
both large scale and farmer-owned, have been relatively effi-
cient. These have contributed to increased reforestation rates in
recent years (Table 17.3).

Matamoros ( 1988) reports that 6 million cu. m of wood is cut
annually; of this. 33 per cent is used for fuel, less than 25 per
cent is used in the timber industry and more than 42 per cent is
wasted. These figures are somewhat higher than those reported
by FAO (1994) and indicated at the head of this chapter.
According to Flores (1985), the average volume of wood cut in
the commercial forests is 50.8 cu. m per ha. About 310 sq. km
are logged each year. This should yield 1.574,800 cu. m of tim-
ber but only about 850,000 cu. m reaches sawmills and as little
as 382,000 cu. m of processed wood is produced

Table 17.3 Reafforestation in Costa Rica from 1964 to 1989

Year

Annual isij. hn)

Cumulative (sq. km)

1964-

-1979

0.44 (mean)

7.0

1980

8.1

15.1

1981

1982

13.6

39.6

1983

9.8

49.4

1984

12.9

62.2

1985

87.2

1986

41.7

129

1987

182

1988

48.3

230.4

1989

280.4

Source:

WRI(I99I)

164

Costa Rica

(MIRENEM/DGF. 1988). At present, it is far more profitable
for landowners to clear their land and produce agricultural crops
for export than it is for them to try and manage forests for a sus-
tained yield of timber.

The direct economic value of forest exploitation is very
low. only 3.6 percent of the value of agricultural (MIRENEM.
1989). The forest sector is considered to contribute only one
per cent to GNP. This is due to the fact that the only element
taken into account is the value of timber supplied to industry.
Other factors, such as the creation of jobs and the production
of firewood and other direct and indirect forest products, are
being ignored (Flores, 1985). In addition, forests are
immensely important for the protection of catchments, both of
agricultural areas and of hydro-electric schemes, and are
valuable for tourism.

A recent study indicates that the depreciation of the value of
the forest resource is very high, exceeding 100 million dollars in
1989 (WRI, 1991 ). If this loss of forest capital were to be taken
into account when calculating Gross National Product then,
instead of an annual growth of three per cent in GNP (World
Bank, 1991). a decline of almost two per cent per year could be
demonstrated in recent years.

A Tropical Forest Action Plan was completed in 1991, but
the implementation of the plan has been limited by the failure of
international development assistance agencies to provide finan-
cial support for it.

Deforestation

Within a period of only 50 years, the forest cover of Costa Rica
has declined from 80 per cent of the total territory to under 30
per cent. More than 99 per cent of tropical dry forest, 77 per
cent of the tropical moist forest and 54 per cent of the tropical
wet forest have been cleared.

Several studies indicate that deforestation has increased dra-
matically since 1922, but that it has been most severe in the four
decades from 1950 (see Figure 17.1). During this period, aver-
age annual deforestation has exceeded 500 sq. km. The root of
the problem is a combination of official policies aimed at
expanding the economy, liberal laws of land possession and a
high rate of population growth (WRI, 1991). FAO (1993) esti-
mates annual deforestation between the years of 1981 and 1990
to have been 496 sq. km, a rate of 2.9 per cent, which is consid-
erably higher than that in any other Central or South American
country except Paraguay. However in their recent report, Lutz er
al. (1993) estimate that clear cutting in Costa Rica is now only
50 to 100 sq. km per year, as opposed to their estimate of 300 sq
km being cleared each year in the past. They also report that
since their survey was completed in 1992, a government analy-
sis of LANDSAT data for the period 1986 to 1992 found aver-
age annual deforestation to be 1 70 sq km. They consider that the
decrease can be explained by the fact that conversion histori-
cally occurred on land most suitable for agricultural use, and
that the remaining forest lands are of increasingly marginal use
for agriculture. In addition to this conversion. Lutz et al. esti-
mate that the authorized change from primary to secondary for-
est, from secondary to logged-over secondary forest or from tree
stands to solely pastureland may reach 310 to 360 sq. km per
year. Including estimates of overcutting at authorized sites and
cutting at unauthorized sites, Lutz et al. consider that selective
logging could reach between 510 and 590 sq. km per year.

Most forest depletion has been caused by an increase in the
area cleared for pasture. In other words, deforestation has been
mainly the consequence of the expansion of livestock produc-

tion. This process started in the 1950s and was based on policies
designed to encourage the export of beef. The generous credit
programmes supporting beef production were funded almost
exclusively by external sources. From 1950 to 1984. land used
for livestock production increased by 10,264 sq. km (MIREN-
EM/PAFCR. 1990); pasture now occupies more than 54 per
cent of the land. In spite of this, meat exports have never
exceeded 8.6 per cent of Costa Rica's total exports.

This increase in livestock production, which required large
areas of land and a small labour force, was not of benefit to the
poor campesinos; instead it turned them into land speculators
(WRI, 1991). They settled in uncultivated public lands, cleared
some of the forest then sold the 'improved' lands to buyers who
had economic power and access to bank credit. These buyers
turned the areas into livestock farms. This process occurred so
fast that it was not possible to extract and make good use of the
trees that were cut down on the land. As a consequence, more
than 90 per cent of the wood was wasted. This led to the "cul-
ture" of squandering that still prevails among Costa Rican
campesinos and loggers. However. Lutz et al. (1993) consider
that smallholders squatting on public or private land play only a
minor role in current land clearing or logging.

Lutz et al. (1993) regard economic motives of the owners of
forested land to be the current driving force behind most of the
conversion and selective logging: the main objective being to
realize the gains from timber harvesting or from subsequent
agricultural production or both. Forest clearing to establish a
stronger claim to the land no longer appears to be a motive, as it
was in the past (Lutz et al.. 1993).

The rate of deforestation has been accelerated by the increase
in road building in the country. For instance, the completion of
the Interamerican Highway meant that clearing of the forest
rose five fold along the Pacific slope. Similarly, deforestation
on the Atlantic slope increased after the construction of the San
Jose to Limon road. As a result of the clearance, erosion, flood-
ing, falling river levels and weed infestation are causing diffi-
culties in many areas. These problems are widespread along the
entire central and south Pacific slope.

Until 1984. the forest was generally considered an obstacle to
agriculture and cattle raising and deforested land was regarded
as more valuable than forested. However, at that time a law was
passed prohibiting the clearance of forest from land that was
unsuitable for agriculture. Recently, there has been an increase
in public concern about the destruction of the forests, with many
more people in favour of the conservation of nature.

Biodiversity

The rich flora and fauna present today in Costa Rican forests are
the result of the dispersion of biota from the two large continen-
tal masses of North and South America. These two blocks were
separated until the end of the Pleistocene, when the Central
American isthmus containing Costa Rica was formed.

This geographical situation, the variety of landscapes (moun-
tain ranges with peaks over 3800 m, intermountain valleys of
different altitudes and coastal plains and prairies of various
characteristics and sizes), its condition as a barrier separating
two oceans and the consequent five different climatic regions
has resulted in Costa Rica containing more species per unit area
than most other countries in the world (MIRENEM, 1992;
Quesada, 1990). Containing .some 10,000 plant species, 850 bird
species, 228 species of mammals (about half of these are bats).
215 reptile species, 160 species of amphibians, 130 species of
fresh water fishes and around 360,000 species of insects, it is

165

Costa Rica

Figure 17.1 Deforestation in Costa Rica between the years of 1940-1987

Dense forest

(80 - 100% canopy cover)

Source: Fundacion Neotropica ( 1988)

166

Costa Rica

Lt\i;,i;iiix III ilu Cdllii UiiUc loic.st Riscivc. Usa Peninsula.

(WWF/OlgaSheean)

home to between four and five per cent of the world's terrestrial
animal and plant species (Quesada, 1990).

Many of Costa Rica's species, both plants and animals, have
still not been described and. with the current rate of habitat
destruction, it is likely that they will disappear before they are
known (MIRENEM/SPN. 1992). The tropical moist and wet
forests have the highest biodiversity in the country and these
ecosystems are vanishing rapidly.

For its size. Costa Rica may have the most diverse plant life
in the world (Davis et ah. 1986). For instance. La Selva Private
Reserve, an area of only 14 sq. km, contains as many as 1740
vascular plants (Hammel, 1990). Gentry (1978) estimated that a
total of 8,000 species occur in the country, while L.D. Gomez
(1984. cited in Davis et al.. 1986) considers that 10,000 occur.
Of these. 1393 are believed endemic (Davis er a/.. 1986).

Forty-five commercial timber species are threatened, nine of
these are endemic (CEAP.ECO., 1991: MIRENEM. 1992).
Among the threatened species are the mahoganies Swietenia
humilis and S. macrophylla, cocobolo Dalbergia retusci, bal-
samo Myroxylon balsamum. Belize yellowwood Podocaipiis
giialemalensis. Conlia gerascanthiis. Paikici pendiila and Mora
oleifera (MIRENEM. 1992).

The 1994 lUCN Red List of Threatened Animals
(Groombridge. 1993) contains 37 species (12 mammals, seven
birds, seven reptiles, one amphibian and ten invertebrates) that
are found in Costa Rica. Few, however, are restricted to the
country. The threatened non-endemics include the Central
American squirrel monkey Saimiri oerstedii. the giant anteater
Myrmecophaga tridaetyla. the Central American tapir Tapirus
bairdii and the American crocodile Crocodylus acutiis: these are
all relatively widespread. In contrast, the threatened mountain
squirrel Syntheosciurus brochiis and eight-spotted skipper Dalla
octomaculata are found otherwise only in Panama. Excluding
birds, the golden toad Biifo periglenes is the only endangered
vertebrate endemic to the country. Many of the invertebrates
listed are endemic, including most of the Odonata such as
PaUieinneina gigantula. P. melanota. Diaphlebia pallidisiyliis
and Epigomphus camelus.

Collar el al. (1992) list only four threatened bird species in
Costa Rica. One of these, the mangrove hummingbird AinazHia
boucardi is endemic. The other three species are the keel-billed
motmot Electron carinatum. the bare-necked umbrella bird
Cephalopteriis glabricollis and the yellow-billed cotinga
Carpodectes antoniae. Destruction of their forest habitat —

including mangroves — is the cause of the decline of all of
these species. Hunting and the cagebird trade are also a threat in
Costa Rica (Stiles, 1985). The species most affected by hunting
is the great curassow Cra.x rubra, while the scarlet macaw Ara
macao. yellow-headed amazon Amazona ochrocephala, dark-
backed goldfinch Carduelis psaltria. yellow-bellied siskin C.
.xanthogastra and yellow-tailed oriole Icterus mesomelas are all
commonly kept in cages by the local people and are threatened
as a result (Stiles, 1985).

Luis Elizondo of the National Institute of Biodiversity
(INBio) has produced an unpublished list of the amphibians,
reptiles, birds and mammals that are threatened in Costa Rica
(rather than being globally threatened as listed by lUCN). He
considers 76 bird and 18 mammal species to be threatened and
1 1 birds and three mammals to be in danger of extinction in the
country (Elizondo, 1991). As well as the golden toad, he lists
the toad Atelopus senex as heading for extinction, possibly due
to the introduction of exotic fish such as the trout Sabno gaird-
neri. The reptiles he lists as threatened are the marine turtles.

A recent study (MIRENEM/SPN. 1991) identifies the areas
of highest endemism in the country. They are the Talamanca
region, the highlands of the central volcanic mountain range,
the Golfo Dulce area and the Isla del Coco (these regions are
all under the protection of the national parks system). This
same study assessed the contribution of biodiversity to the
country's development and the cost of conserving it. It demon-
strated that the most effective mechanism to conserve biodiver-
sity in the long term is the National System of Consenrition
Areas, which is the new pattern of management of protected
areas in Costa Rica.

Conservation Areas

Costa Rica is internationally known for its efforts in the field of
conservation. Although the first national park was created in
1945 (Hartshorn et al.. 1982), it was in the 1970s that the
process effectively began. Now over 70 areas (excluding the
anthropological reserves) have been established (see Table
17.4) and more than 20 per cent of the country's territory has
been legally declared as belonging to some kind of conserva-
tion area. Only the national p^^rks. biological reserves, wildlife
refuges and national monuments are listed in Table 17.5 and
shown on Map 17.1 as these are the only ones in lUCN's cate-
gories I-IV. Three of the national parks (Barra Honda — 23 sq.

Table 17.4 The establishment of protected areas in Costa Rica

Categories

Year

Before

1971 71-75 76-80 81-85 86-90 1991

Total

National Park
Biological Reserve*
National Monument
Wildlife Refuge
Forest Reserve
Protection Zone
National Forest

Total

" including the private resen'es
Source: MIRENEM/SPN ( 1992)

167

Costa Rica

km. Cahuita — 1 1 sq. km and Volcan Irazu — 23 sq. km) have
also been excluded as these are in category V. There are two
private biological reserves. La Selva (14 sq. km) and
Monteverde (105 sq. km — see Box in Chapter S), which arc
not mapped or listed.

The administration of the protected areas falls under a variety
of different organisations. The National Parks Scrxice (Servicio dc
Parques Nacionales — SPN) manages national parks, biological

Table 17.5 Conservation areas in Costa Rica

Existing conservation areas in lUCN's categories 1-IV are listed
below. For information on World Heritage sites. Ranisar sites and
Biosphere reserves see Chapter 8.

National Parks

Arenal

Ballena*

Braulio Carrillo*

441

Chirripo*

502

Corcovado*

546

Guanacaste*

325

Isla del Coco Marine'"'

Juan Castro Blanco*

143

La Amistad (Talamanca)*

1,939

Manuel Antonio*

Palo Verde*

132

Santa Rosa'*'

372

Tapanti*

Tortuguero*

189

Volcan Poas*

Volcan Rincon de la Vieja*

141

Biological Reserves

Cabo Blanco*

Carara*

Hitoy-Cerere*

Isla Pajaros

<0.1

Isla del Cafio

Islas Guayabo y Negritos

Lomas Barbudal

Wildlife Refiiaes

Barra del Colorado*

980

Baulas

Cafio Negro*

100

Curii*

0.8

Gandoca y Manzanillo

Golfito*

Isla Bolaiios"'"

Ostional

Penas Blancas

Tamarindo

National Monument

Guayabo Archaeological Site

Total

reserves and national monuments. The Forest Service (DGF) man-
ages the forest reserves and protection zones, which cover about
4600 sq. km, but are all in lUCN's category VIII as exploitation of
natural resources is permitted with permission from DGF. The
Wildlife Department (Departamento de Vida Silvestre — DVS) is
responsible for the wildlife refuges. The National Commission for
Indian Affairs (Comision Nacional de Asuntos Indi'genas —
CONAl) supervises the 30 or so indigenous reserves, which cover
around 5800 sq. km. In addition, the private sector is becoming
involved in the management of conservation areas. For instance,
Monteverde Biological Reserve is administered by the Centro
CientiTico Tnipical (CCT), while La Selva Biological Reserve is
mn by the Organisation for Tropical Studies (OTS).

Many of Costa Rica's conservation areas were established
without scientific studies of their natural or cultural features or
an analysis of their socioeconomic situation. Instead, such fac-
tors as political or personal interest strongly influenced the iden-
tification of the areas to be protected (Hartshorn et al., 1982).
There are still problems within the protected areas system. In
many cases, the boundaries of the areas are not marked on the
ground and frequently private property occurs within the sup-
posedly protected area. For example, the SPN owns only one
hectare of Cahuita National Park (Hartshorn et al.. 1982). Most
areas do not have management plans and exploitation of timber,
fuelwood and wildlife is common, particularly in forest
reserves. Almost all of Costa Rica's remaining forest is now
found in its protected areas system.

A new strategy for the management of protected areas called
the National System of Conservation Areas has been recently
designed. Its purpose is to achieve management of the protected
areas in a regional context and to integrate the neighbouring
communities in an effective manner. The system has given rise
to new features such as the development of resource manage-
ment programmes involving non-profit, private conservation
organizations (MIRENEM/SPN. 1992).

The development of protected areas has promoted the "eco-
tourism industry ". which is today the country's second largest
foreign income generating activity.

Conservation Initiatives

The Conservation Strategy for Sustainable Development in
Costa Rica (MIRENEM, 1989) aims at defining long and medi-
um term policies which would lead to the integration of conser-
vation and sustainable development. The strategy promotes a

Forest protected in Corcovado National Park.

(WWF/H. Juncius)

6.341

area with moist forest wiihin iis boundaries as shown on Map 1 7. 1
not mapped

168

Costa Rica

new, integrated approach to conservation and development, but
it has not yet been given any official recognition by the govern-
ment.

The Forestry Action Plan for Costa Rica
(MIRENEM/PAFCR. 1990) was based on a diagnosis of the
forest situation in the country. It demonstrated that the present
pattern of farming was causing a "significant deterioration"" of
natural resources. It has been officially acknowledged and has
served as a base for the National Development Plan of the cur-
rent government. External technical and financial cooperation in
the forest sector is linked to the plan's implementation.

An important recent initiative was the creation of the National
Institute for Biodiversity. This institute is a private, non-profit-
making organization, the purpose of which is to carry out a

national inventory of biodiversity and improve the information
on biodiversity and its uses for the benefit of the country.

The development of new mechanisms to support conserva-
tion activities (such as the "foreign debt-for-nature swap") has
provided conservation programmes with large amounts of
money and. therefore, with greater long term stability. NGOs
have played an important role in this field. Two of the inost out-
standing NGOs are the National Parks Foundation and the
Foundation for the Development of the Central Volcanic
Mountain Range, which jointly administer some US$50 million.

The government has provided a series of incentives to
strengthen management of the private forest sector. These
incentives help national, regional and campesino organizations
to plant and manage forests.

References

CEAP.ECO ( 1991 ). Iiifonne Nacioual de Costa Rica (BorraJor

de Disciision). Fundacion Neotropica y Comision del Nuevo

Orden Ecologico Internacional. Ministerio de Relaciones

Exteriores y Culto. San Jose, Costa Rica.
Collar, N.J., Gonzaga, L.P., Krabbe, N., Madroiio Nieto, A..

Naranjo, L.G., Parker III, T.A. and Wege. D.C. (1992).

Threatened Birds oftlie Americas. The ICBP/WCN Red Data

Book. ICBP, Cambridge, U.K.
Davis, S.D., Droop, S.J.M.. Droop. Gregerson. P.. Henson. L..

Leon, C.J., Villa-Lobos, J.L.. Synge, H. and Zantovska. J.

(1986). Plants in Danger: What do we know? lUCN. Gland.

Switzerland and Cambridge, U.K.
Elizondo, L.H. (1991). Especies de Anfibios. Reptiles, Aves y

Mamiferos Amenazadas o en Peligro de Extincion en Costa

Rica: Breve Reseha. Base de Datos de Biodiversidad.

Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad. Heredia. Costa Rica.

63 pp (unpublished).
FAO ( 1993) Forest resources assessment 1990: Tropical coun-
tries. FAO Forestry Paper 1 12. FAO, Rome, Italy.
FAO (1994). FAO Yearbook: Forest Products 1981-1992. FAO

Forestry Series No. 27, FAO Statistics Series No. 116. FAO.

Rome, Italy.
FAO/UNEP (1981). Tropical Forest Resources Assessment

Project. Los Recursos Forestales de la America Tropical.

FAO. Rome. Italy.
Flores. J. (1985). Diagnostico del Sector Forested Iiuhtslnal.

San Jose, Costa Rica. Editorial UNED.
Fundacion Neotropica (1988). Desarrollo Socioeconomica y el

Ambiente Natural: Sitacion Actual y Perspectives. Ramirez.

A. and Maldonado (Eds). San Jose, Costa Rica.
Garita, D. (1989). Mapa de cobertura boscosa de Costa Rica

(scale 1:200.000) MIRENEM/DGF. San Jose. Costa Rica.
Gentry. A. (1978). Floristic knowledge and needs in Pacific

Tropical America. Brittonia 30 134-153.
Gomez, L.D. (1986). Vegetacion de Costa Rica. In: Vegetacioii

V Clima de Costa Rica. Gomez, L.D. and JJerrera, W. (eds).

EUNED, San Jose. Costa Rica.
Groombridge, B, (Ed.) (1993). 1994 lUCN Red List of

Threatened Animals. lUCN Gland. Switzerland and

Cambridge, U.K. 286 pp.
Hammel, B. (1990). The distribution of diversity among fami-
lies, genera, and habitat type in the La Selva flora. In: Four

Neotropical Rainforests. Gentry. A. H. (ed). Pp. 75-84. Yale

University Press, New Haven.
Hartshorn, G.S. ( 1983). Plants. In: Costa Rican Natural Historw

D. Janzen (ed.). The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Pp. 118-350.
Hartshorn, L. et al. (1982). Costa Rica: Country Environmental

Profile. Tropical Science Centre. San Jose, Costa Rica.
Holdridge, L.R. (1967). Life Zone Ecology. Tropical Science

Centre. San Jose, Costa Rica
Holdridge, L.R., Grenke, W.H., Hatheway, W.H., Liang, T. and

Tosi. J. A. (1971). Forest Environment in Tropical Life

Zones: A Pilot Study. Pergamon Press. Oxford. 747 pp.
Janzen. D. H. (1986). Guanacaste National Park: Tropical

Ecological and Cultural RestorcUion. Editorial Universidad a

Distancia. San Jose, Costa Rica.
Jimenez, J. A. (1992). Mangrove forests of the Pacific coast of

Central America. In: Coastal Plant Communities of Latin

America. Seeliger. U. (ed). Academic Press, San Diego. Pp.

259-267.
Leonard. H.J. (1987). Natural Resources and Economic

Development in Central America: A Regional Environmental

Profile. Transaction Books, Oxford, U.K.
Lutz, E., Vedova W., M.. Martinez, H.. San Roman, L., Vazquez

L.. R., Alvarado, A., Merino. L., Cells, R., and Huising, J.

(1993). Interdisciplinary Fact-Finding on Current

Deforestation in Costa Rica. Environment Working Paper No.

61. The World Bank Sector Policy and Research Staff.
Matamoros. A. (1988). Documento de trabajo: Sector Forestal

y Areas Silveslres. Estrategia Nacional para el Desarrollo

Sostenible de Costa Rica. San Jose, Costa Rica.
MIRENEM (1989). Memorias ler Congreso: Estrategia de

Conservacion para el Desarrollo Sostenible de Costa Rica,

octubre de 19HH. Comp. y d. por Quesada. C. y Solis. V. San

Jose. Costa Rica.
MIRENEM (1992). Estudio Nacional de Biodiversidad. Castas.

beneficios y Necesidades de la Conser\'acidn de la Diversidad

Biologica. Primer Borrador. San Jose, Costa Rica.
MIRENEM/DGF (1988). Censo de la Industria Forestal. San

Jose, Costa Rica.
MIRENEM/PAFCR ( 1990). Plan de Accion Forestal para

Costa Rica. Documento Base. Area 1 : Foresteria en el Uso

de la Tierra; Area 2: Desarrollo Industrial Basado en

Basques: Area 3: Lena y Energia; Area 4: Conser\'acidn de

Ecosistemas. San Jose, Costa Rica.
MIRENEM/SPN (1991). Estudio de diagnostico de las Areas

Protegidas de Costa Rica. San Jose, Costa Rica.
MIRENEM/SPN (1992). Sislema Nacional de Areas

Conservacion. Un luievo enfoque. San Jose. Costa Rica.

169

Costa Rica

Quesada. C. (1990). Estrategia de Conservacion para el

DesarroUo Sostenible de Costa Rica. ECODES. MIRENEM,

San Jose. Costa Rica.
Stiles. F. (1985). Conservation of forest birds in Costa Rica:

problems and perspectives. In: Conservation of Tropical

Forest Birds. Diamond. A.W. and Lovejoy, T.E. (eds). Pp.

141-168. ICBP Technical Publication No. 4, ICBP,

Cambridge.
Tosi, J. A. (1969). Mapa Ecologica de Costa Rica. Tropical

Science Centre, San Jose, Costa Rica.
World Bank (1991). The World Bank Atlas, 1991. World Bank.

Washington. D.C. Pp. 1-25.
WRI (1991). Accounts Overdue: Natural Resource

Depreciation in Costa Rica. Tropical Science Center. San

Jose, Costa Rica/World Resources Institute. Washington,

D.C. 110 pp.

Author: Alonso Matamoros Delgado, San Jose. Costa Rica; with
contributions from Luis H. Elizonda Castillo. INBio. Costa Rica.

Map 17.1 Costa Rica

Cosia Rica loresi data have been derived from two main sources. Forest cover has been digi-
tised from a dyeline map (In nine sheets covering different regions), entitled Mapa de
Cobertura Boscosa de Costa Rica i-^60'7c densidadl The source map was compiled by the
Ministerio de Recursos Naturales. Energia y Minas. Direccion General Forestal (1988). at a
scale of 1:200.000. Forests, at >60^c canopy cover, are shown and are classified as Area de
Bosque Naiural. These natural forest areas have been digitised to compile the forest cover data
shown on Map 17.1,

An ecological map. Mapa Ecologico — Republica de Costa Rica, using Holdridge Life
Zones, has been selectively digitised and overlaid onto the forest cover information, to delimit
ihe submontane and montane forest types of Costa Rica. The source map. published in 1 969 and
produced by Joseph A. Tosi Jr.. Centro Cientifico Tropical, San Jose, depicts 19 Life Zones. Of
these, five zones have been digitised, from Ihe Piso Moniano Bajo and Pi-\o Montana forest for-
mations, to locale submontane and montane moist forest. The source classes have been digitised
and harmonised in the following way: submontane rain forest comprises Ltnver montane moist
forest. Lower montane wet forest and L^wer montane rain forest; montane rain forest includes
Montane wet forest and Montane rain forest. The limits of dry forest {tropicai dr\ forest) have
also been derived from this map. The location and extent of remaining mangroves were sup-
plied by the author,

Spatial data for the protected areas of Costa Rica have been extracted from a 1 :500.000 scale
dyeline map Mapa de Areas Silvestres (1989), prepared by the Ministerio de Recursos
Naturales. Energia v Minas and Direccion General Forestal. Costa Rica. Additions and
updates have been made to protected area boundaries from information hand drawn onto large
1:200.000 scale maps (Instituto Geografico Nacional. 1969). and kindly made available to
WCMC by the Servico de Parques Nacionales. Costa Rica.

170

18 El Salvador

Country area 21 ,040 sq. km

land area 20,720 sq. km

^J^l^^"'" '-'',-\

Population (mid-l 994) 5 2 million

Population growth rate 2.7 per cent

Population projected to 202S 91 million

Gross notional product per topita (1992) USS1170

Forest cover for 1 981 (see Map) 1 555 sq km

Forest cover for 1 990 (FAO, 1993a) 1 230 sq km

Annual deforestation rate (1981-1990) 2 2 per cent

..-<i»iii'

Industrial roundwood production 146,000 cu m

j-^'

Industrial roundwood exports —

Fuelwood and charcoal production 4,526,000 (u m

Processed wood production 70,000 cu. m

\ /

>'-

' J5*

""'---

-^,^ .

Processed wood exports —

•A^^.

The high population density in El Salvador has resulted in most of the country being deforested, with little of the land
still in its natural state. A considerable area was deforested even before the beginning of this century. Most of the coun-
try's remaining forest is in the montane area on the border with Honduras. The persistent civil strife has disrupted con-
servation efforts. Nonetheless, some areas of natural forest are under protection.

Introduction

El Salvador is the smallest of the Central American countries
and the only one without a Caribbean coast. Most of the country
consists of rugged volcanic highlands of moderate elevation.
The highest point, 2730 m, is Cerro El Pital on the northwestern
border with Honduras. A narrow coastal plain, interrupted by
mountains and deep ravines, runs parallel to the Pacific ocean.

May to October is the rainy season and precipitation is high
throughout the country during these months; there is little rain
for the rest of the year. San Salvador, the capital, receives
1600 mm in the rainy season and 150 mm in the dry.
Temperatures rarely fall below 18°C except in the highest
mountains. In San Salvador, the average is 23°C with a variation
of only 3°C between the warmest and coldest months.

Population density in El Salvador, at 251 people per sq. km.
is considerably higher than that in any other Central American
country. About 93 per cent of the population are mestizo, five
per cent are Indian and two per cent are of European origin.
Most of the Indians are descended from the Pipil tribes who
came from Mexico and inhabited almost two thirds of El
Salvador before the Spanish arrived. Another important group
are the Lenca, descendants of the early Mayas. Few of the
Indians retain their native way of life. About 45 per cent of the
population are urban inhabitants, with around one quarter of
these living in San Salvador.

The country is primarily agricultural but it is, nevertheless,
more highly industrialised than the other Central America
nations. Major exports include pharmaceuticals, cardboard and
manufactured goods as well as agricultural products such as
coffee, sugar and cotton.

The Forests

Most of El Salvador's natural vegetation was destroyed before it
could be studied by botanists. Daugherty (1974) lists the forest for-
mations that occur in the country: mangroves, evergreen, gallery
and deciduous forests occur in the lowlands and in the highlands
are found cloud forests and mixed pine-oak forests. The hypotheti-
cal distribution of these formations is shown in Figure 18.1.

The lowland formations extended from sea level to about
800-1000 m. The evergreen forests occurred primarily in a nar-
row band along the coast and on the moister floodplains of the
main rivers. Characteristic tree species of this forest type
include Bombax ellipticum, Brosimum terrabanum. Castilla
gitiiniiifera. Ceiba pentandra, Chlorophora tiiictoria,
Enterolobium saman. Myroxylon halsainum. Sidero.xylon temp-
isqiie. Ficiis spp. and Terminalia obovata (Daugherty. 1974).

The most common species found in El Salvador's gallery
forests are Ceiba pentandra, Enterolobium cyclocarpuin, Ficus
spp. and Terminalia obovata. Only small patches of this forest
type remain.

Deciduous forests originally covered around 90 per cent of El
Salvador. Characteristic species of this formation include Biirsera
simaruba, Cedrela spp.. Cordia alliodora, Gliricidia sepium,
Myroxylon balsammn. Piptadenia constricta. Poeppigia procera,
Swietenia spp. and Tabebuia alliodora (Daugherty. 1974).

The pine-oak formation extends from between 800-1000 m
up to 1 800-2000 m in elevation. It was formerly widespread on
the slopes of the volcanic chain in the Centre-South and on the
mountains on the border with Honduras but has now mostly
been cleared. It is dominated by species of Qiiercus and Pinus
oocarpa. Other species include Cedrella mexicana. Clethra vul-
canicota. Permymeniiim spp. and Nectandra sinuata. In areas
where the soil is richer, Liquidambar styraciflita also occurs.
Epiphytes are common in this forest type (Daugherty, 1974).

Cloud forests are generally found above 1800 m. The trees are
20-30 metres tall and are dominated by the families Fagaceae and
Lauraceae. Epiphytes, including bromeliads and orchids, mosses,
lichen and ferns are abundant. These forests are best developed in
the northwest, on Montecristo and El Pital, but can also be found
on the volcanoes of Santa Ana, San Salvador and San Vicente.

Mangroves

In the country's Environmental Profile, mangrove forests are esti-
mated to cover 453 sq. km (Perfil Ambiental. 1985). but Jimenez
(1992) reports an area of only 352.4 sq. km. On Map 18.1, the

171

El Salvador

LOWLAND FORMATIONS

Mangrove Forest

Evergreen Forest (Including Gallery Forest)

Deciduous Forest

I3°I0-

UPLAND FORMATIONS

H Pine-Oak Forest
Cloud Forest

90°

89°

88°

Figure 18.1 Hypothetical climax vegetation of El Salvador

Siiiini'- Daugherty ( 1%')! Irom field observations, 1968-1969; Laver (1955)

mangroves cover 446 sq. km. They are concentrated in four areas;
Bahi'a de Jiquilisco. Barra de Santiago. Estero de Jaltepeque and
Bahi'a de La Union. The main species are Rhizophora inangte.
Avicennia genniiiaus and Lxigiiiiculciria niccinosa. Although they
are, by law. inalienable government domain, the mangroves suf-
fer exploitation for poles, posts, firewood and tannins. In addi-
tion, they are threatened by the encroachment of agriculture, the
construction of shrimp and salt ponds, drainage for mosquito con-
trol and the influx of agricultural pesticides (USAID, 1988),

Forest Resources and Management

El Salvador is thought to have been almost completely forested
at the time of European settlement in the 16th century. In a 1985
study, using data from 1978 and 1979, it was estimated that only
2682 sq km or 13 per cent of the country's land area was covered
with "forest" (Perfil Ambiental, 1985). However, in this report
"forest" included plantations and shrubland (Table 18.1) and
very little undisturbed natural forest (as defined in this Atlas)
reinained. Excluding shiubland and plantations from Table 18.1,
the area of natural closed forest remaining in 1978/79 was only
1846 sq. km or 9 per cent of El Salvador's land area.

FAO ( 1993a) indicates that 1230 sq. km of forest remained in
EI Salvador in 1990, 64 per cent of this is in the hill and mon-
tane zone of the country. FAO (1993a) gives no figure for
closed broadleaved forest in the country. The distribution of the
forests shown on Map 18.1 have been taken from a map that

was published more than a decade ago — in 1981. The area of
the forests given in Table 18.2 (1555 sq. km) is, therefore,
almost certainly an oveiestimate of the present day situation.

The broadleaved forests are scattered in relatively small
patches throughout the country and include riparian forests
along the streams. The most important, for biological diversity
and as watershed protection, are the cloud forests of
Montecristo, Volcan Santa Ana and El Pital (USAID, 1988).
Cloud forests are estimated to cover appioximately 39 sq. km.

As of 1982. El Salvador imported 90 per cent of its wood.
Extensive reforestation over the last several years may help
remedy this situation but any gains are offset by the high rate of

Table 18.1 Areas of Forest Vegetation in El Salvador

Type of Forest Area (sq. km) '7c of total forest % of land area

Coniferous

485

2.3

Broadleaved

908

4.4

Mangroves

453

2.2

Shrubland

778

3.8

Plantations

0.3

Total 2.682

Source: Adapted from PerHI Ambienta! ( 1^^851,

100

172

El Salvador

173

El Salvador

Table 18.2 Estimates of forest extent in El Salvador

Fores! type

rea (sq. km)

% of Uiiul area

Lowland*

746

3.6

Montane+

363

1.8

Mangrove

446

2.2

Total

L555

7.5

* includes deciduous, evergreen and gallery forests (see Figure 18.1)
+ includes cloud forest and pine-oak forest (see Figure I S. I )

Based on analysis of Map I S, 1 . See Map Legend on p, 1 75 for details of sources.

deforestation (USAID. 1988). Given the small size of the public
forest lands and the dense population of rural areas, the major
potential for forestry in El Salvador lies in plantations of com-
mercially valuable species such as teak, and the use of fast-
growing, multi-purpose trees in social and agroforestry pro-
grammes (USAID, 1988). At present, sustained yield manage-
ment of natural forest is almost non-existent.

The minimum legal diameter for harvesting pine trees is
45 cm but although permits have to he obtained from the forest
service before any tree is cut, enforcement is lax. Neither the
finances nor the organisation exist to manage the pine forests
and this is exacerbated by the fact that they are mostly located
in the north of the country where there is much unrest.

Responsibility for implementation of the forest law and for
encouraging sustained use of forest and other natural resources
is vested in the Centre of Natural Resources (CENREN —
Centro de Rescursos Naturales), the National Forest Service is
one of CENREN's subdivisions.

Fuelwood is the most important forest product, more than 80 per
cent of the harvested wood is used as fuel (USAID, 1988). It pro-
vides about 64 per cent of El Salvador's energy requirements.

Deforestation

Deforestation has been faster and more complete in El Salvador
than in any other Central American country (USAID, 1988).
Most of the land originally covered by broadleaved forests was
cleared for agriculture or cattle pastures long ago. After 1840,
the oak-pine forests were progressively cleared for coffee plan-
tations (Daugherty, 1972). In addition. El Salvador took the lead
in road and bridge building as early as the beginning of this cen-
tury, and these developments facilitated the ease with which
migrants colonised forest areas and partially explain why El
Salvador lost most of its forest several decades earlier than other
countries in the region (Utting, 1993). FAO (1993a) estimates
that between the years of 1981 and 1990, 31 sq. km of forest
were cleared each year, a rate of 2.2 per cent, which is higher
than in any other Central American country except Costa Rica.

The density of population and the consequent demand for
land, logging and uncontrolled fires have been other, more
recent, causes of deforestation. As a result, three quarters of the
national territory is now exposed to severe erosion conditions
and decreasing land productivity (Niinez er al.. 1990).

Biodiversity

It is generally thought that El Salvador is the least diverse of the
Central American countries. There are estimated to be 2500 flow-
ering plants (Hampshire, 1989) with 700 tree species and 365
orchids. The vertebrate fauna consists of 30 amphibians, 80 rep-

tiles. 450 birds, 1 10 mammals and 400 fresh water fish (Perfil
Ambiental. 1985). Numbers of invertebrates are unknown, but 400
butterfly species have been recorded (Perfil Ambiental. 1985).

Many of the larger mammals that are found in other Central
American countries are no longer present in El Salvador. These
include the black howler monkey Alouatla villosa. jaguar
Panthera onca. puma Felis concolor and tapir Tapinis hairdii.
Many other species may well disappear in the near future as
their habitat is destroyed. The ocelot Leopardus pardalis. the
peccaries Tayassu lujacii and T. pecari. agouti Dasyproclu
punctata, red brocket deer Mazama aiiiericana and white-tailed
deer Odocileus virfiinia are all species threatened in El
Salvador, though none is considered to be globally threatened
by lUCN (Groombridge, 1993). Mammals listed by lUCN are
the spider monkey Ateles geoffroyi, the margay Leopardus
wiedii, the olingo Bassariscus suinivhrasti and the bat
Leptonycteris curasoae.

There are no endemic birds in El .Salvador and Collar et al.
(1992) list no globally threatened bird species in the country.
There are. though, some locally threatened species. One of
these, in the highland forests, is the highland guan Penetopina
nigra. The considerable loss of forest in all Central American
countries is of particular concern as many of the birds that breed
in North America overwinter in Central America.

There are four endemic reptiles in the country, but no en-
demic amphibians are listed (WCMC, 1992). The only globally
threatened reptiles, other than the marine turtles, listed by lUCN
(Groombridge, 1993) in El Salvador are the American crocodile
Crocodylus acutus and the endemic lizard Abronia montecristoi.
One invertebrate, a dragonfly Amphipteryx agrioides. is listed by
lUCN (Groombridge, 1993).

Conservation Areas

El Salvador has only two protected areas (Table 18.3). Over 30
other small areas — almost all less than 20 sq. km — are pro-
posed. There are currently no official national policies regarding
the use or protection of the environment and natural resources.
The Forestry Law of 1973 allows for the formation of different
categories of protected areas but no detailed definitions of the
categories are given, nor are the regulations governing the use
of the areas outlined (Niinez et al.. 1990). In 1981. the National
Parks and Wildlife Section, a department within the Forest
Service, became the National Parks and Wildlife Service and is,
as such, the first institute in El Salvador specifically responsible
for national park management (lUCN, 1992).

Miinli( risio clinid forest. El Salvador. (WWF/Peter Thomas)

174

El Salvador

Table 18.3 Conservation Areas in El Salvador

Existing conservation areas for El Salvador in lUCN categories I-IV
are listed below

National Parks
El Imposible*
Montecristo*

Total

Area (.?</. km)
32
20

* areas with forest wilhin Ihcir boundaries aecording lo Map 18.1
Sonne: WCMC (unpublished dalal

Initiatives for Conservation

There have been relatively few conservation organisations
active in El Salvador and very little international financial and
technical assistance has been received by the country.

By the end of 1993, El Salvador's government had reactivat-
ed the Tropical Forestry Action Plan exercise with a view to
completing the planning phase by early 1994. The TFAP
Coordinating Unit of FAO is assisting the government in the
preparation of a project document for capacity building, in order
to strengthen the recently created National Forestry Institute.
The exercise has helped to revise Forest Act and integrate
forestry into the National Reconstruction Plan and the National
Environment Aaenda (FAO. 1993b).

References

Collar. N.J., Gonzaga. L.P.. Krabbe. N.. Madrono Nieto, A.,
Naranjo. L.G., Parker III. T.A. and Wege, D.C. (1992).
Threatened Birds cj the Americas. The ICBP/IUCN Red Data
Book. ICBP, Cambridge, U.K.

Daugherty, H.E. (1969). Man-Induced Ecologic Change in El
Salvador. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of California,
Los Angeles. 248 pp.

Daugherty. H.E. (1972). The impact of man on the zoogeogra-
phy of El Salvador. Biological Conservation 4(4): 273-278

Daugherty. H.E. ( 1974). Conservacion Ambiental en El
Salvador con itn Plan Maestro para Parqiies Nacioiiales y
Reservas Equivalentes. Desarrola Forestal y Ordenacion de
Cuencas Hidrgraficas. Informe Tecnico No. 1.
FO:DP/ELS/73/004. UNDP, FAO.

FAO (1993a). Forest resource assessment 1990: tropical coun-
tries. FAO Forestry Paper 1 12. FAO, Rome, Italy.

FAO (1993b). El Salvador. TFAPulse No. 22:3.

Groombridge, B. (Ed.) (1993). 1994 lUCN Red List of
Threatened Animals. lUCN. Gland. Switzerland and
Cambridge, U.K. 286 pp.

Hampshire, R.J. (1989). El Salvador. In: Floristic Inventory of
Tropical Countries: the status of plant systematics. collec-
tions, and vegetation plus recommendations for the Future.
Campbell, D.G. and Hammond. D. (eds). New York
Botanical Garden, New York. Pp. 295-298.

lUCN (1992). Protected Areas of the World: A review of
national systems. Volume 4: Nearctic and Neotropical.
lUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, U.K.

Jimenez. J. A. (1992). Mangrove forests of the Pacific coast of
Central America. In: Coastal Plant Communities of Latin
America. Seeliger, U. (ed). Academic Press, San Diego. Pp
259-267.

Nuriez, R.D., Serrano. F.. Martinez, A.C. and Guerra. H. (1990).

El Salvador Natural Resource Policy Inventory.

USAID/ROCAP Project. Technical report No. 113. prepared

for USAID. Pp. 78-98.
Perfil Ambiental (1985). El Salvador Petfil Ambiental, Estudio

de Campa. USAID.
USAID (1988). El Salvador Action Plan FY 1989-1990. Agency

for International Development Washington. D.C, U.S.A.
Utting, P. (1993). Trees. People and Power: social dimensions

of deforestation and forest protection in Central America.

Earthscan Publications, Ltd, London. Pp. 206.
WCMC (1992). Global Biodiversity: Status of the Earth's

Living Resources. Chapman and Hall, London xx + 594 pp.

Author: Caroline Harcourt. WCMC. Cambridge. U.K.
Map 18.1 El Salvador

The spatial data for El Salvador's forests were digitised from Mapa de Vegetation Arborea de
el Salvador, a map prepared at a scale of 1:200,000 by the Ministerio de Agricultura y
Ganaderia, Direccion General de Recursos Naturales Renovables. Programa Determinacion del
Uso Potential del Suelo. This map was published in 1981; more recent information has not been
traced. The source map is a land use map, illustrating the remaining natural forests as well as
cash crops. Only the Bosque category, which has been mapped as lowland or montane forest
(demarcated by a 3000' contour taken from the Digital Chart of the World) and the Bosque
Imlrohaloftto (Manglares) category, mapped as mangrove, have been illustrated on Map 18,1.
The lowland forest comprises deciduous, evergreen and gallery forest; the montane forest
includes pine-oak and cloud forests; it has not been possible lo categorise the forests in greater
detail than this. The Bosque irregular (Matorral y Manchones Dispersos de Arholes) has not
been mapped as forest in this Atlas-

The boundaries of EI Salvador's protected area were derived from a photocopy of an A3 map.
Uhicacion de Areas para el Eslablecimento de Parques Nacionales \ Resen-as Equivalentes en
El Salvador, which was compiled in 1987 by the Departmenio de Planes v Provectos del
Servicio Forestal and the Centro de Recursos Naturales. Ser\icio de Parques Nacionales y Vida
Silvestre.

175

19 Guatemala

Country area 108,890 sq km

land area 1 08,430 sq km

Population (mid-1 994) 1 3 million

Population growth rate 31 per (enl

Population projected to 2025 21.7 million

Gross national product per capita (1992) USS980

Forest cover in 1 992 (see Map) 48,244 sq. km

Forest cover in 1 990 (FAO, 1 993) 42,250 sq km

Annual deforestation rate (1981-1990) 17 per cent
Industrial roundwood production 1 14,000 cu m

Industrial roundwood export 1000 cu m

Fuelwood and charcoal production 1 1 , 1 42,000 cu m
Processed wood production 26,000 cu m'

Processed wood exports 23,000 cum'

•Figuresfor 1991 (FAO, 19941

Guatemala holds a special position as a bridge between two continents and two oceans; it is endowed with a great bio-
logical diversity and has many endemic species.

The highlands of Guatemala are home to a colourful blend of Amerindian cultures and a rich Spanish American her-
itage. Handicrafts, architecture, landscapes and the people themselves retain a special national identity which has been
lost in many of the more cosmopolitan centres of the region.

The largest area of undisturbed tropical and subtropical forest in the country occurs in the north, in the department of
El Peten. Inland, on the high plateau, there are vast conifer forests and remnants of rainfoiests. Mangrove forests occur
on the Pacific coast. At present about 30 per cent of the country is reported to be covered with mature forest. Some
estimates suggest that as much as 45 per cent of the country is forested. However, all the remaining forests, whatever
their area, are under pressure due to the demand for agricultural land and fuelwood.

Forestry institutions are weak and, although considerable international aid is now flowing to forest conservation,
achievements on the ground have been modest. A National Conservation Strategy has been adopted officially, but little
progress has been made in putting it into practice.

Introduction

Guatemala can be divided into four basic physical regions
(Nations et at.. 1988). In the south, lies the Pacific coastal plain,
with an average altitude of 850 m above sea level. Although the
area used to be covered in dense forest, it is now mostly pasture
and swamp land. Inland of this region is the Pacific mountain
chain consisting of a strip of 33 volcanoes running parallel lo
the west coast. They rise to a height of 421 1 m at the peak of
Volcan Tajumuico, the highest point in Central America. Two
sub-regions are recognised within this area: the boca casta or
foot of the mountains, and the cloud forests at higher elevations.
A central highland region (the Altiplano) occupies almost half
of the country, extending from the Pacific chain in the south to
the Sierra de los Cuchumatanes, Sierra de Chama and Sierra de
las Minas to the north. This region has complex topography
consisting of hills and volcanoes, mesas and valleys. The mid-
dle valley of Rio Motagua includes the driest spot in Central
America (Nations et ah. 1988). The Peten-Caribbean lowlands
occupy the northern third of Guatemala and extend along its
short Caribbean coast. The region is mostly flat with karst relief
(CONAMA, 1991: Nations et ai. 1988). It is here, in the eastern
Caribbean area, that the most humid tropical rain forest is
found.

Geologically speaking, Guatemala, along with the rest of the
Central American isthmus, is young. Twenty million years ago
there was only a chain of volcanic islands in the area. The straits
between them began to close gradually due to the movement of
tectonic plates, but it was only five million years ago that the

isthmus was finally Ibrmed. Guatemala lies over several tec-
tonic plates of slow but continuous movement and is unstable as
a result. The Pacific mountain chain is located in the converging
zone of two of the most important plates: the Cocos and the
Caribbean. Consequently, earthquakes are frequent and often
\ery intense. Guatemala City has been severely damaged by
them on 19 occasions, most recently in 1976, when 25,000 peo-
ple died.

Hydrographically the country is divided into two main sys-
tems: the Pacific System (23,990 sq. km), with short rivers and
steep slopes, and the Atlantic System, with longer rivers and
milder slopes. The latter is subdivided into two sub-systems,
one draining into the Gulf of Mexico (50,803 sq. km) and the
other into the Caribbean (34,096 sq. km). There are IS main
river catchments in the Pacific system and 17 in the Atlantic
.system (CONAMA, I99I; PAFG, 1 99 1).

Only 26.4 per cent of the country's land is considered to have
agricultural potential. A further 21 .4 per cent is suitable for pas-
tures, perennial crops or tree plantations, 37. 1 per cent for pro-
duction forest and 14.1 per cent for protection forest and
wildlife. More than 300 water bodies cover the remaining one
per cent of the country.

The average annual temperature varies from 28°C on the
coast to 10°C in the mountains, with maximum and minimum
extremes of 42°C and -7°C respectively. There is a dry season
from November to April and a rainy season from May to
October, with maximum precipitation in June and September.

176

Guatemala

Average annual rainfall is 1708 mm, but this is not distributed
evenly throughout the country. The east receives around 300 mm
precipitation annually with 45 to 60 rainy days, while in the
north there are up to 200 days of rain per year with total precipi-
tation of about 6000 mm.

Overall, population density is 95 inhabitants per sq. km.
which makes Guatemala the second most densely populated
country in Central and South America. The highest density. 872
inhabitants per sq. km, is in the central region in the department
of Guatemala and the lowest, only 6 people per sq. km, is found
in the department of El Peten (CONAMA, 1991). The indige-
nous population makes up 37 per cent of the inhabitants. There
are 19 Mayan ethnic groups who use 61 different dialects.
Around 82 per cent of these Mayans live in rural areas (Institute
Nacional de Estadistica. cited in PAFG. 1991 ). Only 38 per cent
of the total population live in urban areas.

Agricultural products are the country's major exports. These
include coffee, sugar, bananas, cardamon and cotton. Cultural
tourism is an important and growing industry in Guatemala.

The Forests

There are four main forest types in Guatemala: conifer,
broadleaved, mixed and mangroves.

The conifer forests are located over a wide altitudinal gradi-
ent, between 100 and 4000 m above sea level. They contain
such species as pine Pinus spp., fir Abies guatemalensis, cypress
Cupressus lusitanica and ahuehuete Taxodiuni mucronalum.
The classification of the pines varies, ranging from seven
species and two varieties according to Mittak (1977) to ten
species in the taxonomy used by Schwerdtfeger (1953) and
Veblen(1978).

The broadleaved forests are characteristic of low areas such
as Peten, Izabal, the north of Huehuetenango. Quiche and Alta
Verapaz. The most important commercial species include cedar
Cedrela odorata. mahogany Swietenia inacrophylla. chichique
Aspidosperina megalocurpiiin. palo bianco Tahebiiia donuell-
smithii and Santa Maria CalophyUiim brasiliense. An inventory
recently carried out in the department of El Peten revealed the
existence of some 300 tree species, of which 50 are timber
species (AHT/APESA, 1991 ).

The mixed forests are located in a transition area between the
conifer and broadleaved forest. Pines, oaks Qiiercus spp., liq-
uidambar Licjuidainhar styraciflua and some species from the
Betulaceae family (Ostrya sp. and Alniis spp.) are the dominant
species in this forest type but other genera, including Ocotea.
Nectandra and Persea. are also important.

Mangroves

The mangrove forests are located mainly on the Pacific coast,
where they cover an area of 174 sq. km or 0.2 per cent of the
country's land area. On Map 19.1, the mangroves cover an area
of 161 sq. km.

The mangrove swamps are composed of species of the gen-
era Rhizophora, Avicennia, Conocarpus and Lagunculaha. In
spite of being the essential breeding and feeding grounds for
countless species of marketable crustaceans, molluscs and fish,
the mangroves are still being used to produce charcoal, fire-
wood, dyes, medicines and construction materials. The wood is
valued for building as it is resistant to water. Mangrove areas
have been converted into shrimp and salt ponds and drained for
agriculture (Morales, 1979).

Mangroves are protected in the Monterrico Biotope on the
Pacific coast (not shown on Map 19.1 as it is in lUCN's category

VIII) and the Chocon Biotope on the Caribbean coast. Both of
these sites are managed by the Centro de Estudios
Conservacionistas (CECON) of the San Carlos University.
Other reserves, at Manchon and Punta de Manabique, have been
proposed.

Forest Resources and Management

The figures for area of forest remaining in Guatemala are very
varied. In the 1 99 1 Plan de Accion Forested para Guatemala, it
was reported that forests covered 40 per cent of the country,
81.5 per cent of this being broadleaved forest and the remainder
conifer forest (PAFG. 1991). Figures from the authors of this
chapter indicate that, in 1992, mature forest formations covered
31,843 sq. km, or only 30 per cent, of the country. Of this, the
conifer forests covered 2190 sq. km. broadleaved forests cov-
ered 28,209 sq. km, mixed forests covered 1270 sq. km and the
remainder (174 sq. km) was mangrove forest. The recent report
by FAO (1993), indicates that forest cover in Guatemala was
42,250 sq. km in 1990, but this figure includes areas with as lit-
tle as 10 per cent canopy cover. FAO's (1993) estimate for the
area of closed broadleaved forest in the country at the end of
1990 is 39,460 sq. km.

The source map (see Map Legend) for Map 19.1 includes a
legend showing the areas of different vegetation types within
the country. This has been translated and is reproduced here as
Table 19. 1. It is noted on the source map that the categories are
subject to revision and should not be taken as definitive. The
source map is undated, but is based on one published in 1992
and was sent to WCMC in mid- 1993.

The total forest area shown on Map 19.1 is, at 48,244 sq. km
(Table 19.2), slightly higher than the total of the first eight cate-
gories given in Table 19.1. It is. however, not clear how much
of this is forest as defined in this Atlas. The open forests (which
measure 9462 sq. km on Map 19.1 ) may be degraded or may be
naturally open formations, and the humedal certainly includes
wet grassland as well as swamp forests. As explained in the
Map Legend, the figure given in Table 19.2 for montane forests
includes all broadleaved and mixed forests above 1000 m, but

Table 19.1 Areas of different vegetation formations in Guatemala

rest Type' A,

rea (sq. km)

Conifers

2,699

Open conifers

1,982

Marsh, wetground

5,734

(humedal)

Broadleaf

28,370

Open broadleaf

6,170

Mixed

874

Open mixed

1,065

Mangroves

167

Not determined

5,102

(clouds/shadows)

Marsh, swamp (paiuaiw)

1.914

Other+

54,812

Per cent of country'

Total

108,889

2.48

1.82

5.27

26.05

5.67

0.80

0.98

0.15

4.68

1.76

50.43

100.00

Tipo de Bosque — obviously not all of these are actually forests

Note this is counliy, not land, area.

includes urban areas, agricultural land, pastures, watcrbodics and scrubland {nniforralfs)

tree: PAFG (nd)

177

Guatemala

179

Guatemala

Table 19.2 Estimates of forest extent in Giiateniala

Forest type

Area (si/, km)

% ImnI area

Lowland moist

27.913

25.7

Montane

10.208

9.4

Swamp

5,708

5.3

Pine (conifer)

4.254

3.9

Mangrove

161

0.1

Total

4S.244

44.5

Based on analysis ol" Map 1 9. 1 . .Sec Map Legend on p 1 84 for details of source.

not any conifer forest. Similarly, these two categories have been
incorporated into the lowland moist forest type if they occur
below 1000 m.

Forest management, the u.se of timber and non-timber prod-
ucts and the conservation of fauna and flora, are the responsibil-
ity of DIGEBOS. the Direccitin General de Bo.sques y Vida
Silvestre (Forests and Wildlife General Office). This was estab-
lished in June 1988 to replace INAFOR, the Instituto Nacional
Forestal (The National Institute for Forestry). DIGEBOS is
under the Ministerio de Agricultura. Ganaden'a y Alimentacion
(MAGA) {Ministry of Agriculture. Livestock and Food).

The conifer forests are an important source of fuel. During
1990, these forests yielded six million cu. m of firewood. This
wood was used for home heating (especially in the cold regions
of the Altiplano). cooking, bread-making, the production of
lime and the manufacture of earthenware tiles, pots and blocks.
The cotnmunities that live in the country's colder areas are
especially dependent on the conifer forests. They use the wood
for house construction (balks); the pine needles arc used for the
manufacture of adobe (bricks of unburned clay), as fastening
material, as ornaments in family reunions and religious partie.s.
as bedding for animals and as packing material for fragile
agricultural products; while the copal resin is mixed with the
bark of the pine tree to make an aromatic material that is burned
in religious rites.

Closed broadleaved forests are found mainly in the sparsely
populated northern lowlands. These forests have been subject to
industrial logging, with mahogany and cedar being extracted
selectively. Even though the number of trees taken is low, only
two or three per hectare, a considerable amount of damage is
done to the residual stand. In consequence, regeneration is poor.
In El Peten, extensive, long-term concessions were granted by
Einpressa Nacional de Fomento y Desarrollo Economico de El
Peten (FYDEP). Between 1985 and 1989. 51.000 cedar and
mahogany trees were extracted by 13 large sawmills and these
produced 41 million cu. m of wood.

The forests also yield non-timber products, such as leaves,
stems, fruits, seeds and latex. These include the xate palm tree
(Cluimaedorea elegans and C. oblongata), allspice (Pinieiita
dioica). tropical pine seed (Piinis carihaea). latex from the
chicozapote or chicle tree (Maiiilkara zapota), wicker
iP/ii/oilenclroii sp.). corozo stems, flax and guano palm trees.
Harvest of xate palin leaves, for use in the European and North
American floral industry, provides jobs for more than 6000 peo-
ple, while the export of this species earns US$3.7 millions. In
1988, the production of chicle (used in chewing gum) totalled
about 136.054 kg. which represented earnings of US$333.0()0.
Exports of allspice are worth US$16 million retail in the United

States and Europe, but only US$1 -2 million accrues to
Guatemalans (Nations et «/., 1988).

In 1975. the government began providing tax incentives for
reforestation. Between 1981 and 1983. a total of 55 sq. km were
reforested. Between 1984 and 1988. the average area reforested
reached 20 sq. km per year. Recently a large scale reforestation
programme was launched in the northeast of the country. It is
estimated that 80 sq. km of plantations are now established each
year.

One of the most important reforestation prograinmes is the
DIGEBOS/CARE/Peace Corps agroforestry programme, which
operates in 69 sites in 15 forest subregions. This programme
promotes the establishment of forest and fruit nurseries, agro-
forestry, plantations, construction and maintenance of equip-
ment for soil conservation, pasture improvement and commu-
nity forest management. In the period 1990-1991, DIGEBOS
contributed US$45,000 cash, plus the salaries of regional coor-
dinators and promoters. CARE, the Cooperativa Americana de
Remesas al Exterior (The American Cooperative for Foreign
Remittances), donated US$250,000. and the Peace Corps pro-
vided some 40 volunteers.

Another community forest project, supported by the US
Agency for International Development, began in 1985. It aims
to carry out reforestation, extension and training for the estab-
lishment of community forest plantations and nurseries in the
western Altiplano.

The German Association for Technical Cooperation (GTZ)
supports a community forest project in the department of Baja
Verapaz in the northern part of the country. The project
involves forestry and agroforestry training, improvement of
resin tapping and distillation methods, establishment of demon-
stration smallholdings and silvicultural techniques.

Deforestation

As with the figures for forest cover, the estimates for deforesta-
tion in Guatemala vary quite considerably. However, it is evi-
dent that the last few decades have seen extensive clearance of
the forests, and if present trends continue, Guatemala's forest
cover will disappear within 25 to 40 years.

According to FAO figures reported by Leonard (1987), 77
per cent of Guatemala's surface area was covered by forests in
1960 and only 42 per cent remained in 1980. Studies carried out
by IPGH, the Instituto Panamericano de Geografi'a e Historia
(Panamerican Institute of Geography and History), gave a figure
of 40,700 sq. km of forest pre.sent between 1985 and 1987 and
indicated that this was a decrease of 16.4 per cent with respect
to the preceding decade.

FAO/UNEP (1981) estimated forest loss at 712 sq. km per
year, although Lanly ( 1981 ) implies this may be an overestimate
as he notes that this study did not take into account those defor-
ested areas that were alxindoned and reverted to secondary for-
est. Mendez Domi'nguez (1988) reported deforestation at
between 1080 and 1620 sq. km. or I to 1.5 per cent annually.
The most recent FAO ( 1993) estimate is that 813 sq. km are lost
each year, a rate of 1 .7 per cent.

According to Rose ( 1988), 63 per cent of forest destruction in
Guatemala is due to over-harvesting of firewood. 29 per cent to
agricultural colonization, 6.5 per cent to forest fires and pests
and I . I per cent to industrial use of wood. However, Escobar
( 1990) indicated that 90 per cent of the destruction is due to col-
onization, eight per cent to fires and two per cent to the use of
forest products. He reported that 23 per cent of the deforestation
occurs in the conifer forest (126 sq. km per year) and 77 per

180

Guatemala

cent in the broadleaved forest (430 sq. km per year) and that
most of the destruction (380 sq. km per year) occurs in El Peten
and the Verapaces.

Molinos (1991) reported that of the 19 million cubic meters
of wood cut in 1990. 12 million cu. m (63 per cent) were used
as firewood for both domestic and industrial use. six million (32
per cent) rotted or burned in the field and one million (5 per
cent) was used as industrial logs. Fifty per cent of the wood
used as firewood came from the conifer forests, 25 per cent
from mixed forests and the remaining 25 per cent from the
broadleaved forests. It is calculated that this wood "saves" the
country US$300 million in oil-generated energy (Molinos.
1991). The figure given in FAO (1994) for industrial round-
wood used in 1990 is the same as that at the head of the chapter
and is somewhat lower than that reported by Molinos ( 1 99 1 ).

The main cause of depletion of the conifer forest in the
Altiplano is firewood collection (Mendez Dominguez, 1988).
This is not the case in the wet forests of El Peten. There, the
destruction of the forest is due to the expansion of the agricul-
tural frontier. The trees are cut and burned to clear the land for
the use of settlers and livestock breeders (Nations et al. 1988).
Land is cleared by both small-scale farmers, who practice shift-
ing agriculture, and large-scale farmers, who sell their products
to local and foreign markets.

The most important forest pest is the pine weevil
Dendroctomis sp.. which lives as a parasite of Pinus rudis in the
Guatemalan Altiplano (Pisano. 1991 ).

Biodiversity

Guatemala's location on Ihe "Indo-American Biological
Bridge", the meeting point of the nearctic and neotropical flora
and fauna, results in high biological diversity. There is also a
high degree of endemism in the country. Guatemala contains 14
of the Life Zones described by Holdridge (Figure 19.1 and
Table 19.3) and is home to one of the well-known Vavilov
Centres (the postulated centres of the origin of domestic crops).

The flora is diverse with an estimated total of 8000 vascular
plants, with over 1000 endemic species (Davis et al.. 1986).
This includes 17 conifers, 450 broadleaved trees, 527 orchids —
with 57 endemics, I 10 ferns and 519 mosses (55 endemics). A
number of plants in Guatemala are listed on Appendix I of
CITES. These include the fir tree Abies guatemalensis.

Table 19.3 The extent of Holdridge' s Life Zones in Guatemala

Life Zones

Subtropical spiny bush
Tropical dry forest
Subtropical dry forest
Subtropical warm moist forest
Subtropical hot moist forest
Subtropical hot wet forest
Subtropical cold wet forest
Subtropical rain forest
Tropical wet forest

Subtropical lower montane moist forest
Subtropical lower montane wet forest
Subtropical lower montane rain forest
Subtropical moist montane forest
Subtropical wet montane forest

E.xrent

(sq. km)

per cent

928

0.85

216

0.20

3,964

3.64

12,320

11.31

27,000

24.80

40.780

37.45

2,584

2.37

1,144

1.05

2.636

2.42

9,769

8.97

5,512

5.06

908

0.83

0.08

1,040

0.96

t ! Sublfopical spiny bush

^^1 Subtropical rain rarest

^^1 Tropical dry toresl

^^H Tropical wet lorest

\^m^ Subtropical dry toresl

^^1 Subtropical lower montane moist loresl

I^H Subtropical warm moist lorest

^^1 Subtropical lower montane wel forest

^^1 Subtropical hot moisi forest

1 1 Subtropical lower monlane rain toresl

1 1 Subtropical hot wet lorest

1 1 Sublropical moist monlane foresi

^^1 Sublropical cold wet forest

H^l Subtropical wel montane lorest

Figure 19.1 Holdridge

s Life Zones of Guatemala

Honduras mahogany Swietenia hinuilis. palo Colorado
Engelhardtia pterocarpa, copey oak Quercus copeyensis.
Skinner's orchid Cattleya skinneri, Balmea stonniae, the coun-
try's national flower "monja blanca" or white nun Lycaste skin-
neri var. alhci and the "madera santa" or saint wood Giuiiacwn
.■sanctum (Nations et al.. 1988).

According to D'Arcy (1977), as much as 70 per cent of the
high mountain vascular flora is endemic. The Altiplano is one
of the few regions in the tropics where conifers are well repre-
sented in the flora. There are two Juniperus species (J. comitana
and J. standleyi) in Guatemala and 26 Quercus species. Some of
the latter, such as the Q. acateiiangensis. are among the world's
tallest oak trees, competing with the well-known copey oak.

There have been 1464 species of vertebrates recorded — this
excludes the marine species. There are 250 species of mammals,
664 species of birds, 23 I reptile species, 99 amphibian species
and 220 species of fresh water fish (Nations et al., 1988).

The larger mammals of the forests of El Peten include the
jaguar Panthera onca. puma Felis concolor. tapir Tapirus
hairdii. spider and howler monkeys Ateles geoffroyi and
Aloiiatta palliata. kincajous Potiis flavus and peccaries Tayassu
pecari and Tayassu tajacu. Many of these species were previ-
ously found on the southern coast of Guatemala but their forest
habitat has now been destroyed in that region. Forty species of
mammals are considered to be endangered within the country
though only eight globally threatened mammals are listed by
lUCN as occuiTing in Guatemala (Groombridge. 1993). These
are the spider and howler monkeys, the margay Leopardus
wiedii. oliiigo Bassasicyon sumichrasti. tapir Tapirus hairdii.

181

Guatemala

two bats Leptonycteris cunisoae and L. nivalis and the manatee
Trichechus manatus.

There is more information about birds than about any other
animal group in Guatetnala. Of the 664 species reported. 480
are resident and 184 are migratory. Although no detailed stud-
ies have been conducted on the conservation status of
Guatemala's birds, many species are considered endangered
due. in particular, to hunting and habitat destruction. One. a
non-forest species, the Atitlan giant grebe Podilymbus gigcis.
may even be extinct. Collar et at. (1992) list four species
(Oreophasis derbianus. Electron carinatum. Tangara cahanisi
and Dendioica chrysoparici) as threatened in the country, none
is endemic. .Some birds, including the quetzal Pharoinachriis
niocinno. the horned turkey Oreopkasis derbianus and the ocel-
lated turkey Agriocharis ocellata. are protected by the coun-
try's game laws.

At least 480 bird species live in the forests of the El Peten.
including the .scarlet macaw Ara macao. the harpy eagle Harpia
harpyja and the ocellated turkey. Migratory species such as the
stork Jabirii niycteriu and the orange-breasted falcon Falco
deiroleiicus nest in the forests.

The most endangered of the amphibians are the frogs from
the family Hylidae and the salamanders from the family Pletho-
dontidae which live in the moist lowland forests and the cloud
forests. None, though, is listed as threatened by lUCN
(Groombridge. 1993). The montane forests contain several
endemic species of amphibians, such as the salamander Agaly-
chnis moreletii and the frogs Eleutherodactyhts hocourti. E.
daryi and E. xucanebi.

There are three groups of reptiles that are economically
important; the sea turtles, the crocodiles and caimans and the
iguanas. Of these, the sea turtles such as Lepidochelxs olivacea.
Dermochelys coriacea. Erelmochelys imbricata and Chelonia
niydas agassizi and the crocodile Crocodylus nun-etetti of El
Peten. are seriously endangered due to indiscriminate hunting.
The iguanas Iguana iguana and Cleniisanra siniilis are in great
demand for food in both urban and rural areas and this is lead-
ing to a decline in their numbers. lUCN (Groombridge. 1993)
lists nine threatened reptiles: five marine turtles, the river turtle
Dermatemys mawii, the American crocodile Crocodylus acunis.
the beaded lizard Helndenna horriduni and the endemic snake
AdelphicDs daiyi.

Five threatened dragonflies occur in Guatemala
(Groombridge, 1993), but the total number of invertebrates is
unknown.

Conservation Areas

Guatemala's first protected areas were created in 1955 when 10
areas were designated as national parks under the direction of
INAFOR. Their designation was based on the beauty of the
scenery rather than on the presence of particular habitats or
species. As a result, many are not listed in lUCN's categories
I-IV. During the 60s another two areas were added and a further
eight in the 70s. In the next decade, national interest and pres-
sure from international conservationists meant that many other
areas were protected (Table 19.4 shows all existing areas in cat-
egories I-IV ) and a further 1 3 have been proposed. The rate of
creation of protected areas is. nevertheless, still well below the
general rate of 4.5 per year in Central America. In addition, land
ownership conflicts have not been resolved for many of the
areas and few of them are delimited on the ground. A large
number has no permanent management staff on site (Godoy and
Ugalde. 1992).

The legal framework for protected areas is Decree 4-89,
issued by the Congress of the Republic on February 14th. 1989.
This was modified by Decree 18-89 and promulgated by
Governmental Agreement No. 759-90. in force since August
27th. 1990. Decree 4-89 and its modifications appoint the Slate
as the Administrator and Guarantor of the use and conservation
of the natural and cultural resources enclosed in the protected
areas. They state that any use of these areas requires an autho-
rization from the Consejo Nacional de Areas Protegidas
(CONAP). (National Board for Protected Areas). Protected
areas may be managed by organisations other than CONAP
only through a legal agreement with CONAP and under its
supervision. Other institutions concerned with protected areas
include the Guatemalan Tourism Institute (INGUAT). the
Institute of Anthropology and History (IDAEH). CECON and
the National Council for Urban and Rural Development, as well
as some NGOs.

In Guatemala, there are still very few people properly trained
in the management of protected areas. There is also not enough
money to run the protected areas. Although some is provided by
the state, this barely covers the payment of salaries.
International development agencies, foundations, and conserva-

Table 19.4 Conservation Areas of Guatemala

Existing conservation areas in lUCN's categories I-IV. For informa-
tion on World Heritage Sites, Biosphere Reserves and Ramsar Sites
see Chapter 8.

tioiuil Parks

Arealsq. ki

El Tigre*

3.500

Lacandon*

2.000

Laguna Lachua*

100

Mirador/Dos Lagunos/Rio Azul*

1.470

Sipacate-Naranjo*

Tikal*

574

Trifinio National Park*

Volcan de Pacaya*

Biotopes

Cerro Cahui*
Chocon-Machacas*
Mario Dary Rivera Quetza+
San Miguel - El Zotz*
University Biotope for
Conservation of Quetzal*

Cultural Monuments
Aguateca*
Ceibal*
Dos Pilas*
Ixcun
Ixmiche*
Machaquilla*
Naj - Tunich
Quirigua*

Total

63
112
420

17
21
32

0.5
20

0.5

0.3

8.334.3

Area with forest within its boundiirics as shown on Map 19. 1
+ not mapped

Source: WCMC (unpublished data)

182

Guatemala

tion organizations donate some funds. Debt-for-nature swaps
have not had much impact.

Threats to the protected areas include disputes over land
titles, poaching, expansion of the agricultural frontier and fire-
wood extraction. Another problem is that most of the conserva-
tion areas are less than 100 sq. km with only four over 1000 sq.
km. The larger ones are generally those created in the last ten
years or so and the four largest were established as recently as
I990(UICN/CNPPA, 1992).

Initiatives for Conservation

Since the creation of the National Commission for the
Environment (CONAMA) in 1986, and the proclamation of the
Law for the Protection of the Environment (Decree 68-86), the
conservation sector has become much more dynamic. The Law
for Protected Areas was passed in 1989.

In 1991, governmental agencies from the U.S. A, Germany
and Sweden gave their support to conservation projects in the
country. Other institutions, such as WWF, The Nature
Conservancy (TNC), Conservation International (CI) and lUCN
have projects in Guatemala. UNESCO, FAO, Institute
Interamericano de Cooperacion para la Agricultura (IICA) and
Centro Agronomico Tropical de Investigacion y Ensenanza
(CATIE) also work in Guatemala.

In 1987, the Guatemalan Government asked IUCN"s Central
American office for its support in the creation of a Strategy for
Sustainable Development in El Peten. The region of Nakum-
Yaaxja-Naranjo. which includes large expanses of natural for-
est, archaeological sites and sites of recent and rapidly increas-
ing colonization, was identified as one of the priority areas for a
protection programme.

lUCN's project aims at establishing a model of sustainable
development in the region, based on the conservation of the nat-
ural resources base, the community self-administration, and the
use of appropriate technologies (UICN/ORCA, 1988).

Lately, lUCN and the WWF have been working on strength-
ening local initiatives for the development of the National Park
of Laguna Lachiia.

Another important protection initiative is the agreement
signed between the Guatemalan Government and USAID to
develop the Mayan Biosphere Reserve; this was formerly
known as the Mayarema Project. The project will help achieve
better management of the natural renewable resources and pro-
tection of the biological diversity and tropical forests in the
reserve. The cost of the project totals USS22,4 10,000, of which
46.5 per cent will be provided by USAID, 33.5 per cent by the
Guatemalan Government and the remaining 20 per cent is
expected from international NGOs (Agency for International
Development, 1990).

A German funded Emergency Programme for areas south of
El Peten aims to extend protection to those places where the
forests are in immediate danger of destruction because of agri-

Rain forest among the ruins ofTikal. El Peten. (Mark Spalding)

cultural immigration. The southern Peten still has large areas of
relatively undisturbed forest, and the combination of this with
the wetlands, archaeological sites and beautiful landscapes
means that the area has a significant tourism potential. The
whole emergency programme would cost D.M. 27.23 millions if
it is carried out within five years, and D.M. 45.03 millions if
carried out within ten years. It will be financed by the KfW
(Kreditonstalt fur Wiederaufbau — German Bank for
Reconstruction), through the system of direct debt purchase.

With the support of TNC and WWF. "Defensores de la
Naturaleza"" (Nature Defenders) is developing the Sierra de las
Minas Biosphere Reserve, which has a significant forest com-
ponent. The first permit to carry out debt-for-nature swap in the
country was granted to these two foundations.

References

Agency for International Development (1990). Convenio de
Donacion para el Proyecto de la Biosfera Maya. Guatemala.

AHT/APESA (1991). Plan de Desarrollo Integrado de El Peten.
Programa de Emergencia de Proteccion de la Selva Tropical
en El Peten. Convenio Gobiemos Alemania/Guatemala. Santa
Elena, Peten. Guatemala. 176 pp.

Collar. N.J., Gonzaga, L.P., Krabbe, N., Madrono Nieto, A.,
Naranjo, L.G„ Parker III, T.A. and Wege. D.C. (1992).

Threatened Birds of the Americas. The ICBP/IUCN Red Data
Book. ICBP, Cambridge. U.K.

CONAMA (1991). Agenda Ainbiental de la Repiihlica de
Guatemala (Version Preliminar). Guatemala. 94 pp.

D'Arcy. W.G. (1977). Endangered landscapes in Panama and
Central America: the threat to plant species. In Extinction is
Forever. Prance. G.T. and Elias. T.S. (eds). New York
Botanical Garden, Bronx, New York. Pp. 89-104.

183

Guatemala

Davis, S.D.. Droop. S.J.M., Gregerson. P.. Henson, L.. Leon.

C.J., Villa-Lobos, J.L., Synge, H. and Zantovska. J. (1986).

Plants in Danger: What do we know? lUCN. Gland,

Switzerland and Cambridge. U.K. Pp. 461 .
Escobar. M. ( 1990). Modelo de Diimulacion Forestal Basico de

la Repiiblica de Gualenuda. INFORDE/CAEM/DIGEBOS.

Guatemala. 26 pp.
FAO (1993) Forest resources assemment 1990: Tropical coun-
tries. FAO Forestry Paper 1 12. FAO, Rome, Italy.
FAO (1994). FAO Yearbook: Forest Products 1981-1992. FAO

Forestry Series No. 27, FAO Statistics Series No. 1 16. FAO,

Rome, Italy.
FAO/UNEP (1981). Proyecto de Evaluacion de los Recursos

Forestales Tropicales. Los Recursos Forestales de La

America Tropical. FAO. Rome. Italy.
Godoy, J.C. and Ugalde, A. (1992). Infonne Centroamericano

sobre el Estatus de las Areas Prolegidas. IV World Congress

of National Parks, San Jose, Guatemala. 66 pp.
Groombridge, B. (Ed) (1993). 1994 lUCN Red List of

Threatened Animals. lUCN. Gland, Switzerland and

Cambridge, U.K. 286 pp.
Lanly. J-P. (1981). Evaluacion de Recursos Forestales

Mitiuliales. FAO. Rome, Italy.
Leonard, H.J. (1987). Natural Resources and Economic

Development in Central America: a regional environmental

profile. IIED. Pp. 279.
Mendez Domfnquez. A. (1988). Population Growth. Land

Scarcity and Environmental Deterioration in Rural

Guatemcda. Final Report. The Futures Groups. RAPID II

Project and the University del Valle of Guatemala.

Publication No 5337.210 UNIVA20I.
Mittak, W.L. (1977). Fortalecimiento del Sector Forestal

Estudios para la Reforma Nacional. FO:DP/GUA/72/006

Documento de trajabo No. 25 — Guatemala.
Molinos, S. (1991). Las Iniciativas y la Conservacidn de

Recursos Natuales en Guatemala. Ilnd Forestry Congress,

Guatemala.
Morales. J.V. ( 1979). Importancia Nacional del uso y Manejo

Racional para la Conservacidn del Mangle (Rhizophora

mangle) en el litoral del Pacifico. Unpublished thesis.

University of San Carlos of Guatemala, Agronomy Faculty,

Guatemala.
Nations, J.D.. Houseal. B.. Ponciano, I., Billy, S., Godoy, J.C,

Castro. F.. Miller. G.. Rose. D., Rosa. M.R., Azurdia. C.

(1988). Biodiversidad en Gutemala. Evaluacion de la

Diversidad Biologica y los Basques Tropicales. World

Resources Institute, Washington, D.C. U.S.A.I.D. Project

numberLAC-55I7-A-00-5077-00. 185 pp.
PAFG (1991). Plan de Accion Forestal para Guatemala.

Documento base y Perftles de Proyectos. Guatemala 227 pp.

and annexes.

PAFG (nd) Cubic rla Forestal de la Republica de Guatemala.
Scale 1 :500,000. Plan de Accion Forestal de Guatemala.

Pisano, I. Valenzuela de (1 99 1). La Dindmica Social de la
Deforestacion en Totonicapdn. Guatemala. Instituto de
Investigaciones sobre el Desarrollo Social de las Naciones
Unidas (UNRISD). Guatemala. 95 pp. and annexes.

Rose, D. (1988). Economic Assessment of Biodiversity and
Tropical Forest. Background paper prepared for the
Biodiversity and Tropical Forest Assessment Project. Center
for International Development (IIED) and Guatemala:
U.S.A.I.D., Washington, D.C.

Schwerdtfeger, F. (1953). Los pinos de Guatemala. Informe
FAO/ETAP 202: 57, ff 139.

UICN/CNPPA (1992). Areas Protegidas de Centroamerica.
Informe de la Reunion de Trabajo de Jefes de Parcjues
Nacionales de Centroamerica. Guatemala. 29 pp. and
annexes.

UICN/ORCA (1988). Proyecto Yaaxjd-Nakum-Naranjo
(PYNN). Manejo Integrado de Patrimonio Natural y Cultural
y De.uirrollo Sostenible en Peten. Guatemala. UICN/ORCA.

Veblen. T.T. (1978). Guatemalan conifers. Unysylva 29(118):
25-30.

Authors: Juan Carlos Godoy and C.R. Quiroa. lUCN.
Guatemala

Map 19.1 Guatemala

Forest cover data were digitised from a dyeline map prepared as part of Guatemala's Forestry
Action Plan [Plan de Accion Forestal de GtialemalaJlPAFG). Ttie map. Ciibiena Forestal de la
Republica de Giialeinola — Phiii de Accion Forestal de Gaatemala (nd). at a scale of
1 :500,000. is based on an earlier map Mapa Preliiitiitar de la Ctihierta Forestal de Guatemala
at a scale of 1:250.000(1992).

The source vegetation categories have been harmonised in the following manner: lowland
moist and montane forest (distinguished by overlaying a 3000' contour from the Digital Chart
of the World ) include Latifoliadas. Mt.xto. Latifoliudas Ahiertu and Mixta Abierto: pine forest
comprises Coniferas. Coniferas Abierto; inland swamp forest consists of Humedal. and man-
grove — Maiiglar. Non-forest comprises Urbano. Agricaltura. Pastas. Matorrales and
Puntano: No data comprises Non delenninados (nubes. sornbras).

Several important points should be noted. 1. Open I 'abierto'} broadleaved. mixed and pine
forest formations have been included with the naturally occurring forest categories. It is possi-
ble that some may represent degraded forest. 2, Mixed forests which are a transition formation
containing broadleaved and coniferous species, have been mapped within the broadleaved for-
est classes. The mixed forests are more commonly found in the Altiplano and rarely in El
Peten. 3. 'Humedal' has been mapped as swamp forest but this is likely to give an over-esti-
mate of forest cover as the formation includes other wetland vegetation such as marsh/swampy
grassland. 4. On the source map. the vegetation type in 4.68 per cent of the country could not
be determined

Boundary information for the protected areas of Guatemala originate from a regional map
compiled by CATIE (Centro Agronomico Tropical de Investigacion y Ensefianza) and lUCN.
entitled Areas Silvestres Protegidas de Centro America ( 1 987). Costa Rica.

184

20 Honduras

Country area II 2,090 sq. km

Land area lll,890sqkm

«^""

Population (mid- 1 994) 5 3 million

Populotion growth rate 31 per cent

Population projected to 2025 9 7 million

Gross notional product per capita (1992) USS580

Forest cover in 1990 (sec Map) 52,735 sq km'

Forest cover in 1 990 (FAO, 1 993a) 46,050 sq km

Annual deforestotion rote (1981-1990) 21 percent
Industrial roundwood production 558,000 cu m

Industrial roundwood exporl 9000 tu m

Fuelwood and charcoal production 5,671,000 cu m
Processed wood production 333,000 cu m

—

Processed wood export 40,000 cu. m

' does nol include mangroves

Honduras is the second largest of the Central American countries. It is a very poor country, with the third lowest GNP
per capita in Latin America and the Caribbean.

The extensive conifer forests provide about 90 per cent of forest products. However, most of the deforestation occurs
in the country's broadleaved forests. It is here, and in the mangrove areas, that the majority of Honduras" conservation
areas are found, but many of these are threatened by deforestation. The major underlying causes of this high deforesta-
tion rate are population growth, poverty, skewed land tenure patterns and development policies that have promoted
extensive agricultural practices.

There is an urgent need to strengthen forest management and conservation organizations in Honduras. Development
and land tenure patterns need to be changed and conservation awareness must be enhanced, amongst both decision
makers and society in general.

Introduction

Honduras is a mountainous country that lies in the centre of the
Central American isthmus. More than three quarters of the terri-
tory has slopes greater than 25 per cent. The isthmic character of
Honduras, its abrupt topography and its variable soils have
resulted in a wide range of ecosystems. Eight of Holdridge's life
zones occur in the country. Its major physical regions are the
Caribbean coastal plain in the north, the Pacific lowlands in the
south and the mountains and intermontane valleys of the interior.

The interior highlands make up more than 80 per cent of the
country. Mountains above 600 m occupy 79 per cent of this
highland region, while hills between 150 and 600 m make up a
further 15 per cent; valleys close to sea level constitute the
remainder. The highlands are mostly covered by open pine
forests and the soils are generally shallow, rocky, acid and
eroded. These soils cannot support intensive agriculture. Cattle
ranching is the major economic activity in this area and fire is
used to keep the extensive pastures open.

The northeastern region, where it is influenced by the
Caribbean, has an annual rainfall that ranges from 1750 to
2000 mm. Holdridge's humid and very humid tropical life
zones are found here. Tropical hardwood forests cover 75 per
cent of the urea. The intermountain western watersheds, valleys
and mountains that are not exposed to the Caribbean's humid
influence, are predominantly covered with pine and oak/pine
stands. On slopes or plateaux above 1800 m, cloud forests are
present. In the central area, however, valleys to the north and
east are almost desert-like, in stark contrast to the green cloud
forests above them.

The Gulf of Fonseca, on the Pacific coast, is surrounded by
relatively low, but steep, mountains of volcanic origin that stand

out from the coastal plains and also form islands in the gulf. The
extensive coastal plain has been formed by sediments from its
five main rivers (the Goascoran, Nacaome, Choluteca, Sampile
and Negro); these drain around 13 per cent of the total area of
Honduras. The coast is characterized by narrow areas of man-
groves and by tropical dry forests further inland.

Sixty per cent of Honduras' population inhabit rural regions,
where more than two-thirds are living in extreme poverty
(GOH/SECPLAN, 1991). Population growth rate is high at 3.1
per cent per annum; some of this is caused by immigrants from
war-torn Nicaragua and El Salvador. Overall population density
has increased from 30.6 people per sq. km in 1980 to 47 people
per sq. km in 1994. Density is very varied however as over two
thirds of the inhabitants live in the southern and western high-
lands, while another quarter lives in the eastern area of the Sula
Valley (Leonard, 1987).

The Honduran economy is based on the export of primary
products, mainly from the agricultural, fisheries and forestry
sectors. More than half the labour force is employed in the agri-
cultural sector. In 1990, the forestry sector contributed some
2 per cent to GDP with exports of forest products making up
almost 4 per cent of total exports and totalling USS33.7 million
(FAO 1993b). Coffee, bananas and beef are the most important
agricultural exports.

The Forests

Tropical rain forest, corresponding to Holdridge's humid tropi-
cal forest, is located on the Caribbean lowlands. The region of
La Mosquitia, in the east of the country, contains the largest
portion of this forest. The rain forest is generally limited to

185

Honduras

Table 20.1 Coastal resource alterations

Table 20.2 Forest resources in Honduras

Resource Type

Area

(heclures)

J 987

1989

Mangroves

46,710

45,988

Estuaries

14,240

3,363

Shrimp farms

8,291

20,021

Salt exploitation

1,292

Artisan fishing

624

493

Managed plantations

III

Sand

Forest type
Dense pine
Dense hardwoods

Area (sq. km)
28.353
23,434

Total

Sonne: Molina (1992)

71,326

7 1 .326

regions with more than 2000 mm of annual rainfall with hardly
any dry season and to areas lower than 750 m. These forests are
primarily composed of evergreen hardwood species with a
dense canopy around 60 m high; the understoreys are open.
Common species include Vochysia hondurensis, Virola
koschnyi, Terminalia ainazonici, Cordia alliodora, Swietenia
macrophylla. Ceiha penlandra and Cedrela mexicana
(FAO/UNEP, 1981).

Elsewhere in the lowlands of La Mosquitia, forests of Piiuis
carihaea occur. These are fire clima.x formations, restricted to
highly leached, sandy soils.

A dry deciduous tropical forest replaces the rain forest where
rainfall is distinctly seasonal. Dry forests still occur in the
Pacific lowlands, but only in small degraded fragments, mostly
scattered along rivers and creeks, in stands too small to show on
Map 20.1. The bulk of the remaining dry forest species occurs
as individual trees left standing in pastures and agricultural land
and along fencelines.

Cloud forests occur between 1400 m and 2800 m. They are
replaced by drier oak/pine/liquidamber forests at lower eleva-
tions. Between 2200 m and 2800 m, very wet cloud forests are
found with many mosses and Hepatica. On a few mountains,
stunted elfin forest is found on windswept ridges or exposed
peaks. Conifer species found in the cloud forest include Abies
giiatemalensis. Cupressits lusitanicu. Finns ayacahuite. P. ma.\-
iminoi. P. patiila tecumimanii. P. pseiidostrohiis and
Podocarpns oleifolius. Hardwood trees include Alfaroa hon-
durensis, Alnus arguta, Brunellia mexicana, Cornus disciflora.
Drimys granadensis, Hedyosmum mexicanum. Ilex leibmanii.
Magnolia hondurensis. Matudaea trinen-ia, Olmediella betsch-
leriana. Pilhecellobium vulcanorum. Weinmannia pinnata. W.
tuerckheimii and species from the genera Dendropanax.
Nectandra, Oreopanax. Persea. Phoebe. Quercus and
Symplocos.

Pine and oak-pine associations, corresponding to Holdridge's
humid subtropical life zone, occur between 600 m and 1800 m
over most of central and western Honduras. The predominant
species is Finus oocarpa. often associated with oak Quercus
spp. at lower elevations and with Finus pseudoslrobus and
Li(juidanil?ar styraciflua at higher elevations.

Mangroves

There are areas of mangrove in the Gulf of Fonseca. These sup-
port important local and commercial estuarine fishing indus-
tries. Mangroves are also present in the large river outlets and in
the extensive coastal lagoons of the north coast around Laguna
Quemada, Laguna de Caratasca near Puerto Lempira and east of

Total 5 1 ,787

Source: COHDEFOR/OAS (1992)

% of total cover
55.0
45.0

100

La Ceiba. Common species include Avicennia bicolor,
Rhizophora mangle. Laguncutaria racemosa and Bravaisia
integerrima.

It was estimated that in 1989 mangroves covered 460 sq. kin
(Molina, 1992). However, a 1981 report by Saenger et al.. gave
the much higher figure of 1450 sq. km of mangroves in the
country and in a very recent report. Jimenez (1992) estimated
that there were 1213.4 sq. km of mangrove in Honduras. On
Map 20.1, the mangroves cover 2310 sq. km, but as their distri-
bution has been digitised from a dyeline map (see Map Legend)
with a coastline very different from that used here, errors have
almost certainly been introduced. This estimate has not, there-
fore, been included in Table 20.3 or in the forest statistics at the
head of the chapter.

Considerable changes in coastal habitat have occurred in
recent years (Table 20.1). In particular, many of the mangroves
are being destroyed by the construction of shrimp farms.

Forest Resources and Management

A recent report by the Honduran Forest Development
Corporation COHDEFOR/OAS (1992) estimates that 51,787 sq.
km of forest are found in Honduras, 55 per cent of this is dense
pine forest and 45 per cent is dense hardwoods (Table 20.2).
Together, they cover 46 per cent of the country's land area.

FAO (1993a) estimates that in 1990 there was only 46,050
sq. km of forest in Honduras, of which 24,060 sq. km was
closed broadleaved forest.

The forest cover shown on Map 20. 1 was taken from a map
produced by COHDEFOR in 1992 (see Map Legend) and gives
a total forest cover of 52,735 .sq. km. This excludes the area of
mangroves (see above).

In 1974, Honduran legislation created a Forest Development
Corporation (COHDEFOR), which is an autonomous state for-
est corporation with the power and authority to regulate and
manage all forests in Honduras, regardless of land tenure. Until
1982, COHDEFOR also had the mandate to transform and
export all primary timber products. In 1992. all forestry activi-
ties were privatized. COHDEFOR"s activities were limited to a
regulatory and advisory role in forest management on private
and municipal lands, whilst retaining a full mandate and author-
ity over forests on national lands.

In Honduras, the forest estate is divided into protection

Table 20.3 Estimate of forest extent in Honduras

Forest type

Area (sq. km)

of land area

Lowland moist

11.614

10.4

Montane

12,785

11.4

Pine

28.336

25.3

Total

52.735

47.1

Biised on analysis of Map 20. 1 . but excluding ihe mangrove area. See Map Legend on p. 192
for details of sources.

186

Honduras

Table 20.4 Area deforested in Honduras between 1963 and 1990

Area (sq. km I

Forest type

1965

1990

Deforested

Pine

36,094

28.353

7,741

Hardwood

37.592

23.434

14.158

Total

73.686

51.787

21.899

Source: COHDEFOR/OAS 1 1992)

forests and production forests. The former category is intended
to protect hydrological functions, recreational opportunities and
other environmental services: the forests are not used for com-
mercial purposes. The latter category, on the other hand, is
intended primarily for commercial production of timber. There
are legal stipulations that the forest management plans prepared
and implemented by COHDEFOR take into account the value
and management of non-timber resources. However, in practice,
logging activities are planned and implemented without consid-
eration being given to the value of wildlife or any other non-
timber resource and there is no attempt to protect rare or endan-
gered species.

Honduran pine timber, particularly Piniis caribaea and P.
oocarpa is an important source of foreign exchange. Ninety per
cent of all timber production and forest management activities
occur in pine forest areas, namely in the central, western and
eastern regions of the country. The remaining 10 per cent of
timber production comes from selective cutting of generally
unmanaged hardwood forests.

There has been a decline in production of industrial round-
wood, from 958.400 cu. m in 1987. to 752,200 cu. m in 1990. a
21.5 per cent drop in four years. FAO (1993c. 1994) shows a
similar decline in output — from 990.000 cu. m in 1987 to
558.000 cu. m in 1992. but also shows that there was a decline
from 1980 to 1983 (1,1 12.000 cu. m to 571.000 cu. m) and then
an increase until 1987. Most of this roundwood is consumed by
the sawmilling industry and this too has declined, from 109
sawmills in operation in 1986 to 85 in 1990. In 1990, as well as
the sawmills, there were two plywood and veneer plants and
two resin and gum plants in Honduras.

Exports of forest products have also decreased in value and
importance, dropping from a 6 per cent contribution to total
exports in 1987 to 3.6 per cent in 1990. This means that forest
product exports have dropped in importance from fourth to fifth
place (BCH. 1992). In 1989. forestry contributed 2.8 per cent of
the gross domestic product (GDP) and 10.6 per cent of the agri-
cultural GDP. This contribution decreased in the 1986-90
period. Similar declines occurred in non-timber forest industries
such as those using gum and resin.

Forest-based industries are increasing in importance. There
are 152 furniture manufacturers, concentrated primarily in
Tegucigalpa and San Pedro Sula. As a result, higher value added
timber products have increased their share in total forest product
exports, from 33 per cent in 1987 to 40 per cent in 1990.

The social importance of forestry is reflected in the fact that
almost five per cent of the economically active population work
in this subsector. These jobs are essential for the rural popula-
tion where unemployment is extremely high. Non-timber values
for local communities vary according to the nature of the forest
resource. For instance, for the indigenous communities in the
north and northeast, wildlife and medicinal plants from the sur-
rounding rain forest are of very high value, both for local use
and for commercial exploitation.

Honduras has pioneered a system of community operated
Integral Management Areas (AMIs). These allow communities
to retain the benefits from log sales and from primary and sec-
ondary processed products. They operate in both rain forests
and pine areas. They could be a useful model for replications in
other countries, although some land tenure and management
issues still have to be fully worked out.

In spite of the present decline, the prospects for the forestry
sector are good. Honduras has large volumes of uniform, high
quality timber, an abundant supply of cheap labour and is geo-
graphically located so as to benefit from future regional eco-
nomic integration.

Deforestation

The area deforested in Honduras between the years of 1965 and
1990 has been estimated at 21.899 sq. km (Table 20.4). an aver-
age of 876 sq. km per annum. Previous estimates have indicated
that deforestation rates have been around 800 sq. km per year,
with 81 per cent (645 sq. km) occurring in the broadleaved and
the remaining 19 per cent (150 sq. km) in the pine forests
(Daugherty. 1989). FAO (1993a) estimates that I 1 16 sq. km of
forest was cleared each year between 1981 and 1990. an annual
rate of 2. 1 per cent.

The major areas affected by deforestation have been the
hardwood forests (65 per cent). Deforestation has primarily
affected the Papaloteca. Kruta and Segovia watersheds, the out-
lets of Motagua and Choluteca Rivers and the drainages
between the Caratasca Lagoon and the Kruta River. The
Caribbean watersheds have been particularly affected. Some
have completely lost their vegetation cover; such is the case of
the high part of the Patuca River watershed and the lower part
of the Ulua River watershed.

The major land use changes that have taken place over the
last thirty years have been the expansion of agriculture and,
especially, the increase in pasture for cattle ranches (Table
20.5). Considerable areas of forest have been cleared for these
purposes.

Development policies, promoting and subsidising industrial
cattle raising and other extensive agricultural activities, have
tended to displace populations and expand production on the
basis of increased area and not on improved productivity. These
policies, along with population growth and excessive concentra-
tion of land in a few large holdings have been primary causes of
deforestation.

Recent studies reveal that more than 20 per cent of the coun-
try's territory is over-utilised (in terms of its land-use capacity)
and 12 per cent under-utilised (COHDEFOR/OAS. 1992).
Coincidentally. the over-utilised proportion is almost equal to the
area that has been deforested in the 1960-1990 period. Crop pro-

Table 20.5 Land use changes in Honduras ( 1 960- 1 990 )

Area (sq. km)

Land Use

Forests
Pastures
Crops
Undifferentiated*

1960

73.686

20.265

14.500

3.637

112,088

1990

51.787

34.000

17.770

8.531

12.088

% change

-29.7
+67.8
+22.6

Total

* Undifferenlialed in satellite imagei^ . or utiaccounted lor. and includes water bodies.
Sources: Leonard (1987) and COHDEFOR/OAS (1992)

187

Honduras

188

Honduras

189

Honduras

ductivity is very low on this land, some studies showing it to be
less than one-third the productivity of those same crops in some
developed countries (Leonard, 1987). Cattle raising is especially
inefficient in its use of land. It also deprives small farmers of
land and displaces poor rural people, forcing them to migrate to
forested hillsides, where they practice shifting agriculture.

In Honduras, a large proportion of forested lands has tradi-
tionally belonged to the state, even forest on private lands was
considered a public resource until 1992. However, little effec-
tive control has been exerted over the expansion of the agricul-
tural frontier and over logging areas. This has, in effect, resulted
in forests being an open access resource, free to be exploited on
a first-come, first-serve basis. The lack of control has increased
the rate of forest resource depletion,

Honduras has begun a period of policy reform that has
returned forest property to landowners and has reduced to a
minimum the participation of the State in the national economy
and the market place. However, tenure and wealth distribution
issues still remain, and these continue to have an adverse effect
on the conservation of Honduran natural forests.

Biodiversity

The flora and fauna of North and South America intermix in
Honduras. The forests are inhabited by some fauna that is charac-
teristic of North America (such as the white-tailed deer
Odocoileus virginianus) and others characteristic of South
America (such as the tapir Tapirus hainlii, sloth Biadypus viirie-
gatus, inonkeys Aloiiaiui paltiata and Cehns capiiciiuis and ocelot
Leopardiis pardalis). Indeed, due to some large climatic variations
in relatively small extensions of abrupt terrain and in the moun-
tains, tropical and temperate species of plants and animals can be
found sharing the same habitat. For instance, white-tail deer and

monkeys can be found in the high mountains of the Department of
Yoro, in north central Honduras (Hartshorn and Green, 198.'i).

Honduras has at least 700 species of breeding birds, 173
mammals and 208 reptiles and amphibians (Hartshorn and
Green, 198.'5: WCMC, 1992). Another 225 or so migratory bird
species use the Central American isthmus as a seasonal area,
while at least .S.l species of birds that breed in the United States
and Canada spend the rest of the year in the forests and open
areas of Central America (Millington, 1984). The green turtle
Chelonia niydas, the hawksbill turtle Eretmochely.s imbricata
and the loggerhead turtle Caretta caretta are found along the
Caribbean coast. The green turtle, in particular, is overexploited
off the north coast of Honduras, as its large size make it a
favoured food source (Campanella et al., 1982). Very few
wildlife species in Honduras are sufficiently abundant to allow
for commercial or intensive exploitation and many are scarce or
even close to extinction (Barborak el al.. 1983). Nevertheless,
sport hunting is becoming important in some regions of
Honduras, such as Choluteca on the Pacific, where American
sport hunters pay about US$1 million per year to hunt white-
winged doves Zenaida asicitica. jaguars Pantliera oiua. pumas
Puma concolor and ocelots.

Globally threatened species occurring in Honduras include
the spider monkey Ateles geoffroyi, the tapir Tapirus hairdii, the
margay Leopardus wiedii, the endemic Honduran emerald
Ainazilia hiciae. the keel-billed motmol Electron carinaluin. the
golden-cheeked warbler Dendroica chiysoparia, the American
crocodile Crocodylus acuuis and two dragontlies Amphiptciyx
agrioides and Heteragrion eboratum (Groombridge, 1993).

The least exploited biological resource in Honduras is its abun-
dant plant species. There is great promise in the future for this
immensely rich resource, particularly for the manufacture of pes-

Foresls along the bankx of the Rio PUitano. Rio Pldtauo Biosphere Reserve, Honduras.

(WWF/Craig MacFarland)

190

Honduras

ticides and for medicinal purposes. Thus far. the only significant
research that has been funded in Honduras has been for the use of
the calaguala fern, Polypodium leucotomas, in cancer research.

Honduras is also a rich .source of many internationally impor-
tant timber and multipurpose tree species such as Gliricidia sepi-
iiiii. many Leiicaeiui and Alhizia species, Pinus patiila
leciiiuiiiHinii. Swietenia inacrophylla, Cedrela odorata. Calliandra
calothyrsus and Pinus caribaea. Particularly in the dry forest
areas, these species are being severely reduced in number, which
represents a loss of genetic material of great potential value.

Conservation Areas

Since 1991, COHDEFOR has been responsible for formulating
and implementing national policies and laws regarding the pro-
tection, conservation and management of wildlife and wildlands.
COHDEFOR has a Protected Areas Section (Seccion de Areas
Protegidas) within its Department of Natural Areas and Faunas
(Departamento de Areas Silvestres y Fauna). However, the exact
distribution of responsibilities for protected areas is unclear as is
the distinction between the different categories used. Protected
areas are state owned, but there is provision for private individu-

Table 20.6 Con.servation areas of Honduras

E,\isting conservation areas in lUCN's categories 1-IV. For information on World Heritage Sites, Biosphere Reserves and Ramsar Sites see
Chapter 8. Marine reserves are not listed or mapped here.

National Parks

Capiro-Calentura*
Cayos Cochinos (Marino)
Celaque*

Cerro Azul de Copan*
Cerro Azul Meambar*
Isla de Exposici6n+
La Muralla*
La Tigra*

Montafia de Comayagua
Montafia de Cusuco*
Montana de Yoro*
Montecristo-Trifinio*
Pico Bonito*
Pico Pijol
Port Royal
Punta Sal
Santa Barbaras-
Sierra de Agalta*

Biological Reserves
Cayo Saint Joshs+
El Arenal+
El Cedro+
El Chiflador
El Chile*
El Guisayote
El Pacayal+
El Pital*
El Uyuca*
Guajiquiro

Jardin Botanico de Lancetilla+
Las Trancas+
Misoco
Mogola+
Montecillos*
Opalaca*
Ri'o Kruta
Rio Negro*
Rus Rus*
Sabanetas+
San Pablo+
San Pedro+
Volcan Pacayita*
Verba Buena
Yuscaran

Area (sq. km)

nd
270
155
200
2
249
238
180
184
300

1125

114

nd
782
130
655

120

125

145

500

600

Wildlife Refuge

Bahi'a de Chismuyo

Barbareta

Cayos de Utila

Cuero y Salado

El Armado*

El Jicarito

El Quiebrachal

Erapuca+

Guameru+

Guapinol

La Alemania

La Chaparrosa+

Laguna de Caratasca*

Laguna de Guaymoreto*

Las Iguanas

Mixcure*

Montafia de Corralitos*

Montatia Verde

Monte Cristo

Puca

Punta Condega*

Punta Isopo*

Ragged Cay*

San Bernardo

Teonostal+

Texiguat*

West End

Cultural Monument

Fortaleza San Fernando de Omoa
Parque Arqueologico El Puente+
Petroglifos de Ayasta
Ruinas de Copan*
Ruinas de Tenampua*

Natural Monument

Congolon, Piedra Parada y Coyocutena*
Cuevas de Taulabe*

Total

nd
nd
nd
132
35
nd
nd
65
nd
nd
nd
2

1200
50
14
80
55
83
nd
49
39

112
nd
26
nd

100
nd

nd
nd
nd
3
nd

nd
0.2

8636.2"'

but note Ihal the size of many of [he conservation areas is unknown
* Area with forest within its boundaries as shown on Map 20, 1
+ not mapped

Source: WCMC (unpubhshed data)

191

Honduras

als or a foundation to manage conservation areas. For instance.
Uyuca Biological Reserve is managed by the Escuela Agricola
Panamericana with the authority of COHDEFOR.

Although a few protected areas were gazetted earlier, most
(37) of the conservation areas in Honduras were designated in
1987 to protect cloud forests. A further 24 areas (including three
marine reserves) were proclaimed by presidential decree in
1992. There are also around 30 officially proposed sites, with
many others suggested for protection. Table 20.6 lists protected
areas in lUCN's categories I-IV.

Most of the conservation areas do not have a management
plan, and illegal hunting and timber cutting commonly occurs
within them. In spite of the problems, the Honduran
Government is making an effort to delimit the protected areas
and to begin flora and fauna inventories, particularly in the case
of La Muralla National Park and the World Heritage Site of Ri'o
Platano.

Initiatives for Conservation

There are encouraging signs of support for conservation in
Honduras. US aid is funding studies in La Muralla National

Park. There are plans to establish the Honduran portion of a bio-
logical corridor that would extend from Rio Platano through the
Bosawas (Honduran-Nicaraguan border) as far as Tortuguero in
Costa Rica. The NGO movement is also beginning to show
some promise particularly in conservation for development
efforts, for example in La Mosquitia (Mosquitia Pawisa.
MOPAWI), and in Cuero y Salado Refuge (FUCSA) near La
Ceiba, on the north coast.

Honduras established the beginnings of an environmental
action plan, in preparation for UNCED 1992, but has yet to ini-
tiate the process for the formulation of a National Conservation
Strategy.

Honduras was one of the first countries to prepare a Tropical
Forest Action Plan. The Honduran TFAP identified numerous
projects, of which 15 are presently being implemented with a
total external donation of US$70.6 million (FAO, 1993b).
However, the Honduran TFAP failed to tackle the fundamental
policy issues influencing forests and has now lost much of its
credibility. A new and very recent diagnostic study carried out
for a regional forestry project may serve as a basis for the refor-
mulation of a new and participatory TFAP.

References

BCH (1992). I ml ic adores Economicos de Carta Plaza

1988-1990. Banco Central de Honduras. Departamento de

Estudios Economicos. Tegucigalpa, Honduras.
Barborak. J., Morales, R., MacFarland, C. and Swift. B. (1983).

Status and Trends in International Trade and Local Utilization

of Wildlife in Central America. CATIE. Turrialba. Costa Rica.
Campanella. P., Dickinson, J., DuBois. R.. Dulin. P.. Click. D..

Merkel. A., Pool, D., Rios, R.. Skillman. D. and Talbot, J.

(1982). Honduras II. Country- Environmetital Profile, A Field

Study. Agency for International Development, McLean,

Virginia.
COHDEFOR/OAS (1992). Programa Nacianal de Maneja de

Cuencas. Corporacion Hondurefia de Desarrollo Forestal,

Tegucigalpa, Honduras.
Daugherty. H.E. (ed) (1989). Perfil Amhiental de Honduras

1989. DESFIL, Washington D.C., U.S.A.
FAOAJNEP (1981). Proyecto de Evaluacion de los Recursos

Forestales Tropicales: Los Recursos Forestales de la

America Tropical. FAO, Rome, Italy.
FAO (1993a). Forest resource assessment 1990: tropical coun-
tries. FAO Forestry Paper 1 12. FAO, Rome, Italy.
FAO (1993b). TFAP (Tropical Forests Action Programme)

Update 30. TFAP Coordinating Unit. Forestry Department.

FAO, Rome, Italy.
FAO (1993c). FAO Yearbook: Forest Products I980-I99I.

FAO Forestry Series No. 26, FAO Statistics Series No. 110.

FAO. Rome. Italy.
FAO (1994). FAO Yearbook: Forest Products I98I-I992. FAO

Forestry Series No. 27, FAO Statistics Series No. 1 16. FAO.

Rome. Italy.
GOH/SECPLAN (1991). Urgencias y Esperanzas. Datos

Prioritarios para las Retos de los Noventa. Government of

Honduras Proyecto SECPLAN/OIT/FUAP-HON/87-009,

Tegucigalpa, Honduras.
Hartshorn, G.S. and Green, G. (1985). Wildlands Consen-ation

in Northern Central America. Draft Paper: The Nature

Conservancy International Program. Washington, D.C.
Jimenez, J. A. (1992). Mangrove forests of the Pacific coast of

Central America. In: Coastal Plant Communities of Latin

America. Seeliger, U. (ed). Academic Press. .San Diego. Pp.

259-267.
Leonard, H.J. (1987). Natural Resources and Economic

Development in Central America. A Regional Environmental

Profile. International Institute for Environment and

Development. Transaction Books, Oxford. U.K.
Millington R.S. (1984). The Effect of Land-Use Changes in

Central America on the Population of same Migratoiy Bird

Species. Unpublished draft manuscript. The Nature

Conservancy. Washington, D.C.
Molina, M. (1992). Diagnostica Integral del Sector Forestal de

Honduras. Unpublished manuscript. lUCN/Intercooperation,

San Jose, Costa Rica.
Saenger. P., Hegeri, E.J. and Davie. J.D.S. (eds) (1981). First

Report on the Global Status of Mangrove Ecasystettis.

lUCN/Commission of Ecology.
WCMC (1992). Global Biodiversity: Status of the Earth's

Living Resources. Chapman and Hall, London xx -F 594pp.

Author: Jose Flores Rodas. lUCN Regional Office. Costa Rica
with contributions from Graham Chaplin and Ernesto Ponce,
CONSEFORH, Siguatepeque. Honduras.

Map 20.1 Honduras

Ttie forests shown on Map 20.1 were digilised from a map Cobentira Forestal \ Deforeslacion
{l')6S-l990j compiled by COHDEFOR 1 1992) al a scale of 1:500.000. The source map illus-
irates existing forest cover and areas deforested since 1 965. Only the existing forests have been
digilised for this Atlas whicll include Cnherjura basque lalifoliado digitised to show lowland
moist and montane forest and Cnhertttra basque pinar to depict pine forest The montane torest
has been delimited by a 1000 m contour.

Mangroves are not mapped on the above mentioned source map. Those shown on Map 20. i
are derived from an unpublished map tnd) Mapa de Recursas Casleras compiled by COHDE-
FOR at a scale of 1:1 million. Area measurements of mangrove cover from this map have not
been included in the forest statistics in Table 20.3 (see text).

Boundary information for the protection areas of Hondurtts originate from a regional map
compiled by the Centro Agrondmico Tropical de Investigacion y Enseiianza (CATIE) in Costa
Rica and lUCN. entitled .Areas Sihesires Pralegiitas de Centra .America ( 19871. Point data are
derived from the WCMC protected areas database.

192

Mexico

21 Mexico

Mexico, the third largest country in Latin America after Brazil and Argentina, houses the northernmost tropical forests
in the Americas. As a result of its latitudinal range and topography, the country contains a remarkable climatic com-
plexity and biotic richness that make it one of the most ecologically diverse countries in the world.

The country's economy, the second largest in Latin America after Brazil, is clearly very much influenced by its trade
relations with its northern neighbour, the USA. Agriculture contributes more to domestic product than in most of the
other countries in the region, and foreign investment is a major economic factor. This has led to skewed development
patterns, with some parts of the country dominated by modern intensive agriculture, while elsewhere extensive subsis-
tence agriculture persists.

Mexico's tropical forests are rapidly being fragmented as a result of policy incentives that for the last two decades
have promoted population resettlement, cattle ranching and other forms of forest conversion in the lowlands. However,
conservation is now prominent on the political agenda, to the extent that the president has made strong commitments to
preserve the country's biodiversity. Indeed, Mexico may have reached the development threshold when society at large
will begin to demand forest conservation.

Introduction

Two of the major biological regions of the world, the nearctic
and the neotropical, meet in Mexico. The distribution of the dif-
ferent vegetation types, is. however, strongly intluenced by the
country's complex topography. Mexico is framed by three
major mountain ranges: the two Sierras running north-south.
one (Sierra Madre Oriental) parallel to the coast of the Gulf of
Mexico and the other (Sierra Madre Occidental-Sierra Madre
del Sur) parallel to the Pacific coast: and the central range (Eje
Neovolcanico) running east-west. This range has three of the
five highest peaks in North America, including Mexico's high-
est peak. Citlaltepetl, at 5699 m. The projection of the Sierras
south of the Tropic of Cancer results in the occurrence of tem-
perate forests at latitudes where tropical vegetation thrives in
the lowlands. Most of the vegetation south of the Tropic is a
mosaic of temperate and tropical plant associations with a wide
range of physiognomic variation, apart from that in the flat and
low Yucatan Peninsula in the east and on the southern Gulf
coast plains and piedmont where the vegetation is eminently
tropical.

A federal republic, Mexico is divided into 32 states display-
ing a rich mosaic of cultures, landscapes and natural resources.
However, only the eight southern states of Yucatan. Campeche.
Quintana Roo. Tabasco. Chiapas, Oaxaca, Veracruz and
Guerrero have significant areas of tropical vegetation. This
region accounts for 21 per cent of Mexico's population and the
formal economy of the area is strongly dependent on oil. cattle
ranching, logging and tourism. These eight states also contain

the richest ethnic ancestry of Mexico. Fifty eight per cent of the
country's indigenous population live in them (Toledo et al..
1989). and 24 of the 38 indigenous languages spoken in Mexico
are spoken there (INEGI. 1984). As it is often the case with
indigenous communities in Mesoamerica. many of these groups
inhabit the more remote forested areas of the region, both tem-
perate and tropical, and their cultural practices are closely
linked to the resources contained in those forests.

The Forests

The two main systems of vegetation classification used in
Mexico. Miranda and Hernandez ( 1963) and Rzedowski ( 1978),
tend to differentiate forest types by their physiognomy and phe-
nology rather than by using the Holdridge Life Zone system
(Holdridge et al., 1971), which classifies the forests by the cli-
mate and elevation of the areas where they are found. In the fol-
lowing description of Mexico's forests, forest types in the
Miranda/Hernandez (1963) and Rzedowski (1978) classifica-
tions are grouped into: Tropical rain forests. Tropical seasonal
forests. Tropical montane forests and Conifer and oak forests
(Table 21.1).

"Tropical" refers to vegetation growing in a warm, humid
and frost-free climate — Koeppen's A climate — (Koeppen,
1948). Within this climatic zone, "seasonal" refers to vegetation
subjected to a dry season of three months or more, and "mon-
tane" to vegetation growing in frost-free areas between 1000
and 1500 m.

193

Mexico

Table 21.1 Classification of different forest types in Mexico

Tliis chapter Miranda/Henidiulc:
il963j

Tropical Selva alta perennifolia.

rain forests Selva alta subperennifolia.

Selva mediana

subperennifolia

Rzc'dowski
(1978)

Bosque tropical
perennifolia

Tropical Selva alta/mediana Bosque tropical

seasonal subcaducifolia. Selva baja subcaducifolia,

forests caducifolia. Selva baja Bosque tropical

subperennifolia. Selva baja caducifolio. Bosque

espinosa perennifolia. Selva espinoso
baja espinosa caducifolia

Tropical

Selva mediana/baja

Bosque mesofilo de

montane

perennifolia.

monlana

forests

Bosque caducifolio

Coniferous

Pinares. Encinares,

Bosque de coniferas

and oak

Bosque de oyameles

Qiiercus

forests

Tropical Rain Forests

Tropical rain forests are differentiated by canopy height and
degree of deciduousness. Truly tall, evergreen forests (selva alia
perennifolia) are confined to approximately 10,000 sq. km
(Anaya et al.. 1992), mostly in the premontane Lacandon forest
and the lowland and premontane forests of the Chimalapas-El
Ocote region. These areas represent 10 per cent of the original
distribution of the selvas alias in Mexico (Rzedowski. 1978).
Sehiis alias grow on volcanic soils in areas with the wettest and
warmest climates. Dominant trees in these forests are higher
than 30 m, have buttressed trunks and, not uncommonly, diame-
ters of two to three metres.

Shorter rain forests with a noticeable degree of canopy decid-
uousness (selva alta/mediana subperennifolia) have a greater
geographic range than the taller rain forests. They occur from
northern Veracruz to Yucatan. However, most of the areas
along the Gulf coast originally covered by these forests have
been converted to grasslands or are highly degraded, and today
significant tracts of forest occur only in southern Yucatan.
These selvas inedianas commonly grow in areas characterized
by karstic terrain and a seasonal rainfall of 1200 to 1500 mm
per year. Dominant trees are 30 to 35 m high and up to 50 per
cent of them may be deciduous for two to three months a year.
In Campeche and Quintana Roo, it is common to find relatively
large areas with deficient drainage, known as hajos, covered by
a semi-evergreen forest (selva mediana/baja subperennifolia)
often dominated by Haematoxylum campechianum (Pennington
and Sarukhan, 1968).

A considerable degree of canopy dominance by a single
species is common in Mexican rain forests, especially in the
northernmost and driest associations, such as in ramonales
(Brosimum aliciistriim). caobales (Swietenia macrophylla). tin-
tales (Haematoxylum campechianum) and guapacales (Dialium
guianense). Tree species frequently found in other rain forests
in the country include Brosimum alicastrum, Terminalia amazo-
nia. Dialiiwi i>uianense. Guatteria anomcda. Pseudolmedia oxy-
phyllaria, Swietenia macrophylla and Manilkara zapota.

Tropical Seasonal Forests

Seasonal forests — shown on Map 21.1 as dry forests — fall
along a continuum between relatively tall forests subjected to a
short, but well defined, dry season during which 50 per cent of
the species lose their leaves, and short forests (less than 10 m)
subjected to dry seasons of six months or more during which all
trees lose their leaves. The two main types of seasonal forests
recognized in Mexico are: selvas subcaducifolias (semi-decidu-
ous forests) and selvas caducifolias (deciduous forests). The dri-
est formations are scrub forests dominated by short and spiny
trees and cacti (selvas espinosas).

The phenology and species composition of this seasonal veg-
etation varies considerably even within relatively short dis-
tances as a result of changes in soil depth, slope, aspect, and
land-use history. Since most of the seasonal forests in Mexico
thrive on hilly terrain and have been subjected to various
degrees of human intervention. large tracts of forest with a
homogenous physiognomy are uncommon. The landscape of the
seasonal tropics often displays a patchy distribution of short to
medium forest, thorn scrub, savanna and secondary associa-
tions. Seasonal forests are commonly dominated by a few-
species. A well-defined understorey of shade tolerant trees
occurs only in the tallest and most moist of these associations.
Common tree species in seasonal forests include Bursera
simaruba. Vitex gaumeri, Tabebuia spp.. and numerous
Leguminosae, especially in the driest associations.

Tropical Montane Forests

Tropical montane forests represent the altitudinal limit of tropi-
cal vegetation. The original distribution of these forests follows
an altitudinal belt between 1000 and 1500 m on the western
slopes of the Sierra Madre Oriental, and include areas at a simi-
lar elevation in parts of the Sierra Madre del Sur and northern
and central Chiapas. Associated with altitudinal gradients, the
montane forest is often found in the most humid and warm areas
of transition between oak-pine forests and lowland rain forests.
In the drier and cooler areas, this ecotone is typified by meso-
phyllous forests with a greater dominance of oaks.

Montane humid forests are dense stands frequently domi-
nated by Lic/uidambar styraciflua with canopy heights between
20 m and 35 m and tree diameters between 30 cm and 50 cm.
Canopy deciduousness is apparent in the cooler, but not neces-
sarily drier, months of the year and is rarely complete. The
understorey is lush, and epiphytes (bromeliads and orchids),
vines and arborescent ferns are well represented. The conflu-
ence of the nearctic and the neotropical regions in Mexico is
strongly evidenced in the floristic affinities of these forests.
Characteristically, canopy species belong to temperate genera,
while those in the understorey are typically tropical (Pennington
and Sarukhan, 1968). Common tree species, in addition to L.
styraciflua, include various species of Quercus, Juglans,
Carpinus, Cornus, Eugenia. Dalbergia and Podocarpus. A
more tropical canopy flora has been described (Miranda, 1952)
in warmer and moister montane forests in restricted areas of
Veracruz, Oaxaca and Chiapas (selva mediana/baja perennifo-
lia). These forests are physiognomically more similar to cloud
and elfin forests of other tropical areas, with a dense vegetation
covered by mosses, lichens and ferns.

Conifer and Oak forests

These forests are found over a wide range of ecological condi-
tions and associated with this is the remarkable species richness
of the genera Piiius and Quercus (see section on Biodiversity).

194

Mexico

Table 21.2 Areas of mangroves in Mexico

Region

I: NW
2:NE
3: Centre
4:SE

Total

SomTc:SARH(\992iil

Area (scj.km)
698
76
1,066

3.474

5.315

Pines tend to dominate the cooler and higher parts of the forests,
while oaks are more common in the drier and lower areas. Pine
and oak forests also occur at lower elevations in areas subjected
to a clearly tropical climate. Tropical pine forests include stands
of P. oocarpa, found in the area of Los Tuxtlas in Veracruz.
Arriaga in Chiapas and in parts of the isthmus of Tehuantepec.
and P. carihaea. found in restricted patches in Quintana Roo
(Rzedowski. 1978). Stands of Q. nleoides used to be relatively
common along the Gulf coast, but they were mostly cleared by
cattle ranchers in the 1960s (Gomez Pompa, 1966). These are
mapped as pine forest on Map 21.1.

Mangroves

Mexico's mangroves are being lost very rapidly. In the mid-
1970s the estimated area of mangroves was 15.000 sq. km. but
by 1990 this cover had been reduced to slightly over 5000 sq.
km (Almada. 1992; SARH, 1992a — see Table 21.2). They
form fringes along the coast that may range from a few metres
to a few kilometres in width (Lot and Novello, 1990).

The most important mangrove formations in the Pacific are
Marismas Nacionales in Nayarit and the Panzacola system in
Chiapas. In the Gulf, major mangrove areas occur on the north-
ern coast of Yucatan, Laguna de Terminos in Campeche,
Pantanos de Centla in Tabasco and Laguna Madre in
Tamaulipas. The northernmost limit of mangroves in Mexico is
the eastern shores of the Sea of Cortez.

The floristic composition of the mangroves is relatively con-
stant along both the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. Most are domi-
nated by Rhizophora mangle, which often forms monospecific
stands. Following a predictable zonation. other common species
are Avicennia geniiinans. Lagunciiliirici nicemosa and
Conocarpus erecta.

Mangroves are lost mainly as a result of clearing for agricul-
ture, aquaculture. the development of urban areas and tourist
facilities. They are also being increasingly used for firewood in
the coastal areas (Yafiez-Arancibia and Lara, 1993).

Forest Resources and Management

The exact area of Mexico's tropical forests remains unknown.
One of the major problems is that different sources use different
definitions for the term forest. The most reliable sources
(Masera et a/.. 1992; SARH. 1992a. 1992b) indicate that about a
quarter of Mexico's territory is presently covered with closed-
canopy forests, although the actual figures given in these publi-
cations vary. Approximately half of the area is conifer and oak
forest, 19 per cent is rain forest and 31 per cent is seasonal (dry)
tropical forest (Masera e? a/., 1992; Table 21.3).

FAO (1993) estimates that there is a total of 448. 120 sq. km
of forest within the rain, moist deciduous and hill and montane
zones as of 1990. A further 37.730 sq. km is found in the dry
deciduous, very dry and desert zones — none of which is con-

sidered to be forest in this Atlas. Closed broadleaved forest cov-
ers only 81.770 sq. km (FAO, 1993).

Map 21.1 has been produced from a digital dataset compiled
by the Southern Forest Experiment Station of the US Forest
Service. However, this dataset gives only an approximation of
the distribution of the different forest types and therefore, mea-
surements of the formations could not be taken from the Map.
As a result, no statistic of forest cover as shown on this Map is
given in this chapter.

The digital dataset was produced by classifying AVHRR data
for 1990 and 1991 using information from 1:1.000.000 vegeta-
tion maps. Landsat TM prints and aerial photographs and other
ancillary information such as the personal experience of
foresters and botanists from the Secretariat of Agriculture and
Water Resources (SARH — Secretaria de Agricultura y
Recursos Hidraulicos) and the National Institute of Statistics,
Geography and Information — INEGI (Evans et at., 1992;
Eggen-Mclntosh et al.. 1992). Eggen-Mclntosh et al. (1992)
estimate that total forest area in the country, as measured from
the AVHRR classification, is 663,1 15 sq. km. but this includes
considerable areas of fragmented forest. Including the areas
covered by cloud on the AVHRR imagery, which are. in gen-
eral, forested areas, increases the estimate to 671,622 sq. km.
This is quite similar to the estimate by SARH (1992a). SARH
(1992a) reports that there are 496.477 sq. km of forest with a
canopy cover of 20 per cent or more and 1 80,83 1 sq. km of dis-
turbed (fragmented) forest giving a total of 677,308 sq. km. In
addition. SARH ( 1992a) estimates that there are 35.480 sq. km
of severely disturbed forest land in the country.

Rain forests in Mexico were originally found along the pied-
mont and coastal plains of the Gulf of Mexico from the
Huasteca region in northern Veracruz to Tabasco, northern
Oaxaca and Chiapas and into the Yucatan Peninsula
(Rzedow.ski. 1978; Toledo. 1988).

The three most significant vestiges of rain forest are the
Chimalapas-El Ocote forest between Oaxaca and Chiapas, the
Lacandon forest in northeastern Chiapas and the Yucatan forests
in Campeche and Quintana Roo. The Yucatan forests are an
extension into Mexico of a larger expanse of lowland tropical
forest in the Peten region in Guatemala. Along Mexico's Pacific
coast, rain forests remain only in isolated tracts in southern

Table 21.3 Area of forest in Mexico and percentage of each type
remaining.

Forest

Original

Present

% of land

% oforigii

type'

cover'

area

Tropical

212.000

97,000

5.1

Rain

Tropical

397.000

161,000

8.4

Seasonal

Tropical

16,000

Montane

Conifer

377.000

257,000

13.5

and oak

Total

972.000

515,000

27.0

Foresi type according lo grouping of vegetaiion types described above.

Original cover (in sq. km) calculated from cover of potential vegetation types indicated in

SARH ( 1971 ) — other sources report different figures.

Present forest cover in sq. km (Masera e/n/.. 1992)

195

Mexico

32° N

28°N

24° N

20° N

16°N

Map 21.1 Mexico

Forests

Lowland moist

Montane

Pine

Dry

Conservation areas
Nan forest
No data

Cloud

V/////\

1:9,000,000

100 200 300 400 km

I ' 1—" H 1

100 200 miles

116°W

PA CIFIC OCEAN

112°W

108°W

104°W

196

Mexico

100°W

96° W

197

Mexico

Chiapas and Oaxaca. Elsewhere, rain forest areas have been
substantially converted, altered or degraded to a mosaic of sec-
ondary vegetation.

Seasonal forests represent the most extensive of the tropical
plant associations of Mexico. On the Gulf coast, seasonal
forests occur in parts of central and northern Veracruz and in
the northern part of the Yucatan Peninsula. Their greatest distri-
bution is along the Pacific coast in Chiapas, Oaxaca and
Guerrero, continuing north between the coast and the Sierra
Madre Occidental, well above the Tropic of Cancer. Inland, the
largest tract of seasonal forest is found along the Balsas basin,
between the Eje Neovolcanico and the Sierra Madre del Sur.

It is difficult to assess the extent to which the Mexican mon-
tane rain forest has been degraded or lost. Significant areas have
been converted to coffee plantations. Since these plantations
commonly include shade trees, some of which belong to the
original forest canopy, aerial imagery often fails to differentiate
the plantations from natural forest. It is estimated that the few
remnants of this forest, scattered throughout Chiapas, Oaxaca
and Veracruz, comprise an area perhaps no larger than 10 per
cent of its original extent (Rzedowski, 1978).

The most widely distributed and extensive forests in Mexico
are the oak and pine forests of medium and high elevations,
covering an estimated total of 250,000-257,000 sq. km (SARH.
1991; Masera et al., 1992). Although the greatest extent of these
forests is in the Sierra Madre Occidental in the northern states
of Chihuahua and Durango, oak and pine forests are amply rep-
resented in the south and are one of the dominant vegetation
types in Oaxaca, Guerrero and Chiapas. They cover most areas
above 1800 m in Eje Neovolcanico and Sierra Madre del Sur
and on the mountains of Chiapas and Oaxaca. They are also
found in Sierra Madre Oriental, in a mosaic with tropical mon-
tane forests and other tropical vegetation.

While 15 per cent of the Mexico's forest lands are private
and five per cent are public, the vast majority is communal land

(ejidos) or subject to use-rights by indigenous communities. The
amount of forest land in each ejido varies widely across the
country, and so do the uses that ejidatarios (communal land
holders ) make of their forests. Some may be converted to agri-
cultural land, while activities in others include extraction of tim-
ber, non-timber forest products and firewood, and cattle graz-
ing.

The Mexican Constitution establishes that all forests, regard-
less of their tenure, belong to the nation. Timber harvesting,
either by concessionaires or by ejido cooperatives, is regulated
by the federal government through the Undersecretariat for
Forestry within SARH. With some exceptions, state govern-
ments are not substantially involved in forestry policy or regula-
tion within their jurisdictions.

As established by the forestry law of 1986, logging permits
are granted by SARH on the basis of annual harvest volumes,
and need to be applied for every logging season. Up until the
late 1970s, forestry in Mexico was carried out following an
officially sanctioned method prescribed for all forests, the
Metodo Mexicano de Ordenamiento de Montes (MMOM). This
was a polycyclic system based on the selective extraction of a
small number of trees of a minimum diameter. The MMOM
was designed to preserve the forest "capital" while extracting
the "interest" (Rodriguez, 1958). In tropical forests, the use of
minimum diameters has probably been critical in the per-
sistence of stands of valuable species, but selective timber har-
vesting in stands of shade intolerant pine species has often
resulted in mixed oak-pine stands with a lower commercial
value (Jardel. 1985).

For most of this century, commercial logging was carried out
through concessions granted by the federal government. The
valuable tropical species, mahogany and cedar, were harvested
in extensive areas of Quintana Roo and Campeche first by
American contractors and then by Mexican private and paras-
tatal companies (Snook-Cosandey, 1986). With the forestry law

Plan Piloto Forestal

Plan Piloto Forestal (PPF) illustrates the potential of commu-
nity forestry to control tropical deforestation in Mexico. The
PPF started in 1983 as an officially-sponsored initiative to
transfer forest utilization in the state of Quintana Roo from
concessionaires to ejidatarios (communal land holders). The
main objectives of PPF were the promotion of social and
economic development in the region and the curbing of the
accelerated deforestation brought by the colonization pro-
grams promoted in the 1960s.

Under the PPF, ejidos are organized in forestry coopera-
tives that provide technical assistance and strengthen the pro-
ducers" capacity to negotiate better prices for their timber.
Today 25 ejidos organized in two cooperatives control 2670
of the state's 4200 sq. km of forests. This forest area is the
sum of the permanent forest areas (PFA) demarcated by con-
sensus in each ejido. The PFA is spared from conversion to
agriculture and is dedicated to an integrated forest manage-
ment that includes not only logging, but also the extraction of
non-timber products (chicle gum, spices and honey) which
contribute significantly to the ejido economy.

Forest management is planned at the ejido level and is
supervised by PPF foresters licensed by SARH. Logging is
selective, based on minimum diameters, and is planned

around the extraction of the most valuable species:
mahogany and cedar. Harvesting schedules follow a 25-year
cutting cycle in rotations of 75 years. While this silvicultural
scheme seems to insure sustained yields of mahogany within
the current rotation, its sustainability beyond 2060 depends
on whether current practices insure the seed regeneration of
mahogany and other commercial species. Dependence on
mahogany, however, is seen in PPF as an initial stage that
will be reduced as markets for lesser-known timber species
and specialty products expand and become more reliable.

In less than ten years, forest ejidatarios in Quintana Roo
have gone from leasing their resources to concessionaires, to
harvesting and selling roundwood and now to processing
boards and exploring new markets. In the process, income in
the ejidos has increased substantially, rural communities
have reclaimed control of their lands and deforestation in
Quintana Roo has been noticeably reduced. While long-term
sustainable forest management in Quintana Roo still faces
substantial challenges, PPF has pro\ ided a foundation to
meet them in the context of equitable rural development and
forest conservation.

Sources: Galleti and Arguelles (1987);
Richards (1992); and Snook (1992).

198

Mexico

of 1986. concessions have been phased out and. in their place.
ejiclatarios and indigenous communities, through cooperative
arrangements, have become more active and independent in
wood production and processing. However, the decades of con-
cession forestry, when the largest pine trees were removed and
there was intense extraction of mahogany and cedar, has meant
that the forestry cooperatives have commonly been left with
degraded and impoverished stands whose silvicultural needs are
often beyond the ejiclatarios technical and financial resources.

There are some instances where community tenacity, politi-
cal will and adequate technical assistance are promoting sustain-
able ejido forestry. The Association of Forestry Communities
and Ejidos of Oaxaca (UCEFO). which manages 700 sq. km of
pine forest, has started introducing shelterwood, seed-tree and
other silvicultural methods designed to increase forest produc-
tivity and to help recover degraded stands that were exploited
for decades by a paper company. In Quintana Roo. several asso-
ciations of forest ejidos — collectively known as Plan Piloto
Forestal — are developing silvicultural and marketing strategies
to increase utilization of the lesser known timber species, thus
reducing their dependence on the already creamed stands of
mahogany and cedar (see Box I ). In tropical forests, the extrac-

A casque-headed lizard Laemanctus longipes, found rhroitghoiit
Mexico. Honduras and prol:>al?l\ Nicaragua.

(WWF/Tony Rath)

tion of non-timber forest products, such as chicle Manilkara
zapora. allspice Pimenta dioica. barbasco Dioscorea spp. and
xate Cliamaedorea spp.. often provide a critical incentive to eji-
datarios to maintain their lands under forest cover.

According to SARH (1992b). wood production in Mexico
was 32.3 million cu. m in 1989, of which 23.5 million cu. m
was firewood, and 8.8 million cu. m pulpwood and lumber.
These figures, however, are questionable given the occurrence
of illegal logging and the difficulty of quantifying unregulated
firewood collection. The figures, particularly for fuelwood and
charcoal, estimated by FAO (1994) and given at the head of
the chapter, are considerably lower. Up to 80 per cent of the
industrial wood is supplied by pine forests, mostly in the
Sierra Madre Occidental and to a lesser extent in the Sierra
Madre del Sur. Tropical timber accounts for less than five per
cent of Mexico's annual timber production (i.e. less than
250.000 cu. m); most comes from Quintana Roo and
Campeche (Toledo et al.. 1989). The principal tropical timber
products are sawnwood and plywood from mahogany and a
few other species, and railway sleepers and floorboards from
lesser-known hardwoods.

The forestry sector in Mexico has been slow to recover from
the economic crisis of the 1980s. Timber production rates have
decreased by 25-35 per cent since 1980. reflecting a decreasing
demand for construction wood (SARH. 1992b). On the other
hand, pulpwood imports increased by 80 per cent between 1988
and 1990, and softwood prices in Mexico are now up to 35 per
cent higher than those in the international market (Lara, 1991).
Without a major revamping of the current production scheme,
the forestry sector is likely to be weakened by the eventual
incorporation of Mexico into the North America free trade zone.
Canada and the United States, the world's largest timber pro-
ducers, have a combined production of over 500 million cu. m
per year and a highly developed processing industry with which
Mexican producers and industry can hardly compete (Merino,
1992). Some people predict that Mexico's forest sector may
eventually become restricted to the production of pulpwood on
large-scale plantations established in tropical moist areas that
have already been deforested (Sedjo. 1992).

Responding to this situation, and following a determined pol-
icy of deregulation and privatization, the government passed a
new forestry law in 1992. This law is intended to strengthen the
forestry sector by providing incentives for private investment in
forest plantations and industries. The new law also emphasizes
the environmental value of forests, particularly those in the low-
land moist tropics, and establishes strict limits on the conversion
of forest lands. In spite of this legislation, the challenge to the
forestry sector under NAFTA, privatization and deregulation
remains significant. Forestry policies have traditionally been
superseded by agrarian reform, agricultural credit policies and
development schemes which have promoted forest conversion
to agriculture and cattle ranching.

Deforestation

Degradation and rapid loss of forest cover, particularly in the
lowland tropics, is a critical issue in Mexico. Estimates of an-
nual forest loss country wide vary from 6150 sq. km (FAO.
1988) to 15.000 sq. km (Toledo, 1988). A more recent estimate,
based on state-level information adjusted with data from recent
satellite images, indicate an annual loss of forest cover of 8040
sq. km. a rate of 1.6 per cent per year (Masera el al.. 1992).
According to this study, tropical forests are the most affected,
with an estimated annual loss of 2370 sq. km (2.4 per cent) in

199

Mexico

rain forests and 3220 sq. km (2.0 per cent) in seasonal forests.
These estimates do not, however, take into account forest recov-
ery that is expected to take place after forest fires or abandon-
ment of agricultural lands. FAO ( 1993) estimates annual defor-
estation between 1981 and 1990 in the tropical rain, moist
deciduous, hill and montane zones to be 5977 sq. km. a rate of
1.2 per cent. Around 62 per cent of this occurs in the hill and
montane forests. Across all formations. FAO (1993) estimates
an annual loss of 6781 sq. km.

Truly tall, evergreen forests have disappeared dramatically in
the last two decades. In the mid-1960s up to 40 per cent of the
original area of these forests remained (Pennington and
Sarukhan. 1968). but by the late 1980s only 10 per cent had sur-
vived (Rzedowski. 1992).

Studies show that up to 60 per cent of the loss of tropical
forests in Mexico can be attributed to the expansion of cattle
ranching (Masera el al.. 1992: Toledo, 1990). Cattle ranching
is a multimillion dollar industry that has benefited from spec-
ific incentives provided by the federal and state governments;
these include credits, tax breaks, technical assistance, infra-
structure and land tenure arrangements (Toledo. 1990). In
some cases, cattle pastures are established directly after forest
clearing, whereas in others, a short agricultural period pre-
cedes them.

Massive deforestation in Mexico's tropical area has also
resulted from the grand colonization and development schemes
promoted by the federal government in the second part of this
century. Colonization projects in federal lands have been in
response either to the demand for arable land or for specific
political purposes, such as the protection of the national territory
along the Guatemalan border. The projects have usually in-
cluded an initial stage where logging operations by private con-
cessionaires facilitate penetration and removal of the forest
cover (Gomez Pompa el al.. 1993).

Rain forests along the lowlands and piedmont on the Gulf
coast have been the most affected, notably in the state of
Tabasco. From 1940 to 1985, the state" s area dedicated to cattle
ranching increased from 3500 sq. km to 16.500 sq. km, destroy-
ing in the process nearly 7500 sq. km of lowland rain forest
(Morales. 1990). In addition, in 1972, the federal government
instituted a major social development plan for the area of
Balancan-Tenosique (adjacent to the Guatemalan border). This
failed in its social objectives, but resulted in a further expansion
of cattle ranching (Tudela, 1989). It is estimated that primary
rain forest in Tabasco now occupies about two per cent of its
original area.

This process is not atypical of the rest of the Gulf plains,
from northern Veracruz to the isthmus of Tehuantepec. where
the original rain forest cover has been reduced to less than 10
per cent (Dirzo. 1992). Other areas of particularly intensive
deforestation in the humid tropics are the Lacandon forest in
northeastern Chiapas, Los Tuxtlas area in southern Veracruz,
and parts of the southern half of the Yucatan Peninsula.
Slash-and-burn agriculture is another important factor in
deforestation in the humid tropics, particularly when it is
practised by landless colonos in previously logged areas
(Gomez Pompa, 1990).

Not all of this deforestation is permanent; considerable areas
of secondary forest are found throughout the tropics in Mexico.
Management and protection of these tracts is essential.
Enrichment planting and multiple-use extractive schemes are
particularly promising (del Amo, 1991).

In the seasonal tropics, cattle ranching is the leading cause of

forest loss, followed by firewood extraction, agriculture and
fires. However, structural and functional degradation is less evi-
dent in these dry forests and the extent of their alteration more
difficult to quantify than in moist forest.

Biodiversity

Although Mexico covers only one percent of the earlh's land
area, it contains about one tenth of all terrestrial vertebrates and
plants known to science. The meeting of the nearctic and
neotropical biotic regions, the abundance of topographic islands
and the wide climatic variation across its territory are significant
factors in Mexico's biodiversity.

In the Americas, the country is the richest in reptiles (717
species) and mammals (449 species), third richest in flowering
plants (c. 25,000 species) and fourth in amphibians (284
species) (Fa and Morales. 1993: McNeely et al.. 1990; Table
21.4). Mexico's biota is also conspicuous for its high endemism.
particularly among reptiles and amphibians and the floras of dr>'
and temperate montane habitats (Flores-Villela and Gerez,
1989; Rzedowski. 1991a. chapters in Ramamoorthy et al.. 1993:
Table 21.4).

Mexico's natural habitats range from deserts and alpine
grasslands to tropical rain forests and coral reefs. The various
biomes contribute differently to the overall biodiversity of the
country. While arid areas tend to be high in endemic genera
(Rzedowski, 1991b), forests contribute significantly to species
numbers and, in many cases, to endemism as well. Out of the
estimated 25.000 vascular plant specie^ and 1352 vertebrate
species that can be sorted by habitat. 81 per cent and 75 per cent
respectively are found in lowland rain, seasonal, montane or
pine/oak forests (Flores-Villela and Gerez, 1989).

The floras of the lowland and montane rain forests are con-
spicuously rich, harbouring up to one third of the country's vas-
cular plants (Rzedowski, 1991b). In the case of the lowland rain
forest, floristic richness increases markedly with decreasing lati-
tude. While moist forests in the Huasteca region of northern
Veracruz tend to be dominated by one or two canopy species,
dominance in the southern rain forests is shared by many more.
The number of species of vascular plants in Los Tuxtlas region
in southern Veracruz is estimated at 1300. in an area of less than
100 sq. km (Dirzo. 1992). The flora of the Yucatan moist forest
is significantly poorer in vascular plants than forests subjected
to similar climatic conditions in the Gulf plains (Pennington and
Sarukhan, 1968), probably due to the edaphic constraints of the
Peninsula.

Floristic diversity is most conspicuous in tropical montane
forests. They probably cover less than one per cent of Mexico's
area, but contain almost 10 per cent of the country's species of
vascular plants (Rzedowski. 1991b). Well-preserved tracts of
montane forests in the Sierra Madre Oriental can have up to
eight times more species of vascular plants than other forested
areas in the region (Gonzalez-Medrano, 1972).

Mexico's tropical seasonal forests are reportedly richer than

Table 2L4 Total number of vertebrate and vascular plant species
and number of endemic and threatened species in Mexico

Birds

Mammals

Reptiles

.\mphibians

Plants

Total no.

961

449

284

25.000

Endemics

142

368

173

3,624

Threatened

123

477

Sources: Flores-Villela and Gerez 1 1989). Fa and Morales 1 1993)

200

Mexico

Table 21.5 Diversity and endemism in different forest types in
Mexico

Forest t\pe Flora' Fauna- Restricted species'

Rain 5,000 197 62

Seasonal* 6.000 229 34

Montane 3.000 nd nd

Coniferous nd 119 13

Oak nd 468 134

Conifer & Oak 7.000 nd nd

1. Approximate number of species of vascular planis found in each forest t>pe (Rzedowski.
1991b; Rzedowski. 1993).

2. Numbers of vertebrate species in Mexico that can be assigned to a particular forest type
(Flores-VilielaandGerez, 1989).

3. Species "restricted" to the ecological system (Flores-Villela and Gerez. 1989).
* includes thorn forests

nd Data not reported separately for this forest type.

similar forests elsewhere. According to Dirzo (1992). the floris-
tic richness of seasonal forests in Mexico is about 30 per cent
higher than would be expected from the observed floristic pat-
terns among similar vegetation types. The biological signifi-
cance of Mexican seasonal forests is further increased by their
high degree of endemism. The Balsas basin, one of the largest
areas originally covered by seasonal forests, is considered a
Pleistocene refugium. It has a larger number of species from the
common neotropical genus Biirsera than does any other area;
most of them are endemic to the basin.

The contribution of the oak-pine forest to Mexico's biodi-
versity is also significant. It is estimated that nearly one third of
all vascular plant species found in forest habitats are housed in
oak-pine forests. The diversity of these forests is typified by
Quercus and Finns. Out of Mexico's reported 55 species of
pines and estimated 130 species of oaks, 85 per cent and 70 per
cent respectively are endemic (Mittermeier and Goettsch,
1992). The overall importance of the oak forest is emphasized
by the fact that of the vertebrate species endemic to
Mesoamerica which can be categorised according to habitat.
468 live in oak forests, compared with 229 in tropical seasonal
forests and 197 in rain forests (Flores-Villela and Gerez. 1989;
see Table 21.5).

Of the 961 bird species recorded in the country. 22 are listed
as threatened by Collar et at. (1992); most of these are forest
species. There are 14 threatened endemic species. They include
the bearded wood-pigeon Dendrortyx barbatiis. the Oaxaca and
white-tailed hummingbirds Euphemsa cyanopluys and £. polio-
cerca and the white-throated jay Cyanolyca mirabilis. all of
which are inhabitants of cloud forest and threatened by the
destruction of this habitat.

Bats and rodents together account for 79 per cent of the
total number of mammal species in Mexico (Fa and Morales.
1993). There are 30 threatened mammal species listed by
lUCN in Mexico (Groombridge. 1993). but few of these are
forest species. They include two primates — the black howler
monkey Alouatta pigra and Geoffroy's spider monkey Ateles
geoffroyi; the margay Leopardus wiedii and Baird's tapir
Tapinis bairdii.

There are 20 reptile species listed as threatened by lUCN
(Groombridge. 1993) comprising six marine turtles, six fresh-
water turtles (five endemics), three tortoises (one endemic), three
lizards, one snake and one crocodile. Three amphibians are listed
as threatened by lUCN; these are the Sonoran green toad Biifo

retiformis and the two endemic salamanders Ambystoma ler-
maense and A. mexicanum. The number of fish in the country is
unknown, but around 100 are listed as threatened. There are also
42 globally threatened mvenebrates in the country, mostly meso-
gastropods (12). isopods (11) and dragonflies (9).

Conservation Areas

The legal protection of wildlands in Mexico started in the late
19th century with the demarcation of watersheds and other areas
of environmental and economic value around Mexico City.
During the first part of this century, dozens of protected areas
were established along the Eje Neovocanico. mostly as recre-
ational areas, with some as forest reserves.

In the 1970s, the accelerated development of the lowland
tropics, the inadequacy of the traditional park approach, and the
involvement of the academic community drastically changed
Mexico's approach to the protection of natural areas. Based on
the conservation strategy promoted by UNESCO's Man and
Biosphere program, the first biosphere reserves in Mexico were
established in 1977 in Mapimi in Durango and in 1978 in the
Lacandon forest (Monies Azules). Since then, large size, eco-
logical representation and multiple-use objectives have been
recognized as important factors in the selection and design of
new protected areas.

In 1983. the federal government instituted the National
System of Natural Protected Areas (SINAP) to secure habitat
representation, management capacity and funding for protected
areas. SINAP controls the national parks, special biosphere
reserves and biosphere reserves, which together represent
approximately three per cent of Mexico's land area (Perez Gil
and Jaramillo. 1992). All those conservation areas within
lUCN's categories I-IV are listed in Table 21.6. Many sites are
not given in this list, including the forest reserves and protection
forests which cover approximately 85.000 sq. km.

Until the 1960s, the vegetation type most favoured for parks
was the pine-oak forest: the conservation of tropical forests and
arid habitats occurred only by default as the result of their
remoteness from the main centres of development (Alcerraca et
al.. 1988; Gutierrez Palacio, 1989). However, many reserves
have been established since then and these have significantly
enhanced habitat representation in protected areas, particularly
in the desert scrub (Mapimi), coastal ecosystems (Sian Ka'an,
Pantanos de Centla) and moist tropical forests (Montes Azules.
Calakmul. Selva El Ocote). Rain forests are now the best repre-
sented terrestrial habitat in SINAP. Approximately thirteen per
cent of the estimated current cover of these forests is protected
(Table 21.7). Most of this is accounted for by three reserves:
Calakmul (7232 sq. km ). in Campeche State and Montes
Azules and Selva El Ocote in Chiapas State. In contrast, less
than one per cent of seasonal tropical forests in Mexico is le-
gally protected (Table 21.7). Under representation of these
forests is a remarkable shortcoming of SINAP since seasonal
forests account for a third of the country's forest cover, and
almost a third of its floristic richness.

Being listed as a protected area does not. however, guarantee
the conservation of an area. Most of Mexico's parks and pro-
tected areas are subjected to neglect and abuse (Perez Gil and
Jaramillo. 1992). Montes Azules. Calakmul and Selva El Ocote
are under considerable pressure from cattle ranching, slash-and-
burn agriculture and illegal logging; there are no reliable data on
the actual cover of undisturbed vegetation within these areas.
Efforts to protect them effectively are critical, since together
with the Chimalapas region in Oaxaca. they contain a consider-

201

Mexico

Table 21.6 Conservation areas in Mexico

Existing conservation areas in lUCN's categories I-IV are list-
ed. Marine reserves are not listed or mapped. For information
on World Heritage Sites, international designated Biosphere
Reserves and Ramsar Sites see Chapter 8.

Map Ref

National Park Ai

''ea (sq. km)

Balneario de los Novillos

<G.5

Benito Juarez*

Bosencheve*

150

Cascada de Bassaseachic*

Canon de Ri'o Blanco*

557

Cafion del Sumidero*

218

Cerro de Garnica*

Cerro de la Estrella

Constitucion de 1857*

Cumbres de Majalca*

Cumbres de Monterrey*

2.465

Cumbres del Ajusco

Desierto del Carmen*

El Chico*

El Cimatario

El Gogorron

250

El Potosi

El Sabinal

<0. 1

El Sacromonte

<0.5

El Tepeyac

El Tepozteco*

240

El Veladero

Insurgente Jose Maria Morelos y Pavon*

Insurgente Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla*

Isla lsabela+

IztaccihuatlPopocatepetl*

257

La Malinche*

457

Lago de Camecuaro

<0.1

Lagunas de Chacahua*

142

Lagunas de Montebello*

Lagunas de Zempoala*

Los Marmoles*

232

Los Remedios

Molino de Flores Netzahualcoyotl

Nevado de Toluca*

510

Pico de Orizaba*

198

Pico de Tancitaro*

293

Rayon

<0.5

Sacromonte

<0.5

Volcan Nevado de Colima*

222

Zoquiapan y Anexas*

194

Private Resene

El Morro de la Mancha (INIREB)

Biological Station+

Refuge

La Mojonera+
La Primavera+
Sierra de Alvarez+
Sierra del Pinacate
Valle de los Cirios+

<0.5

305

169

287

35.000

Total

Natural Monument
Bonampak*
Cerro de la Silla+
Grutas de Cocona+
Yaxchilan+

Protection Area for Wild Flora and Fauna
ChanKin* 122

Corredor Biologico Chichinautzin 373

Park
Omiltemi*

Biosphere Resene

El Triunfo*

Montes Azules (Selva Lacandon)*

Sian Ka'an*

Special Biosphere Resene

Cascadas de Agua Azul*

Isla Contoy

Isla Guadalupe+

Isla Rasa

Islas del Golfo de California+

Mariposa Monarca*

Ria Celestiin*

Ri'a Lagartos*

Selva El Ocote*

Resene Zone for Migratoty Fauna
Laguna Ojo de Liebre y San Ignacio

1.192
3.312
5.281

250
<0.1
1 .500
161
591
478
481

Resen'e Zone for Sea Turtle Protection

Playa adyacente a Rio Lagartos

Playa Ceuta

Playa Cuitzmala*

<0.5

Playa de Escobilla*

Playa de Isla Contoy

0.5

Playa de la Bahi'a de Chacahua*

Playa de Maruata y Colola*

Playa de Puerto Arista

Playa de Rancho Nuevo

Playa de Tierra Colorada*

Playa El Tecuan*

<0.5

Playa El Verde Camacho*

Playa Mexiquillo*

Playa Mismaloya*

Playa Piedra de Tlacoyunque*

Playa Teopa*

<0.5

State Park

Agua Blanca+

56.993.8

Area with moist forest within its boundaries as shown on Map 211
not mapped

Natural and Typical Biotope
42 La Encrucijada

300

Source: WCMC (unpublished data)

202

Mexico

Major Protected Areas with Tropical Forests

Selva El Ocote Special Biosphere Reserve in Chiapas (481
sq. km). The abrupt topography of Selva El Ocote results in a
diversity of habitats including dry forests, rain forests, pine-
oak forests and montane elfin forests. Fauna in the area
includes river crocodile, spider and howler monkeys, jaguars,
tapir and harpy eagles.

Monies Azules (Selva Lacandon) Biosphere Reserve in
Chiapas (3312 sq. km). A part of the Lacandon forest.
Monies Azules includes premontane and montane tropical
forest as well as oak-pine forests. The area has high species
diversity and numerous endemic species, including an
endemic plant family. The fauna of Montes Azules includes
several primates, tapir and harpy eagle.

El Triunfo Biosphere Reserve in Chiapas (1192 sq. km).
Situated in the slopes of the Sierra Madre. El Triunfo covers
a wide range of vegetation types, from lowland dry forest to
oak-pine forests, and is best known for its magnificent cloud
forests. El Triunfo is rich in endemic and endangered species
such as the Horned Guan, the Quetzal and several snakes and
amphibians. Jaguars, tapirs and howler and spider monkeys
are common.

Calakmul Biosphere Reserve in Campeche (7231 sq. km).
This area is not shown on Map 21.1 or listed in Table 21.6 as
it is in lUCN's category V. Calakmul is mostly covered with
dry and moist lowland tropical forests It is part of a signifi-
cant forest tract that extends south of the border to the Peten
in Guatemala and Belize. Because of its size and strategic
location, Calakmul provides a critical habitat for migratory
birds (18 species of wood warblers) and endangered birds

(ocellated turkey and great curassow), and serves as a sanctu-
ary for several species of felines, monkeys, tapir and two
species of deer.

Sian Ka'an Biosphere Reserve in Quintana Roo (5281 sq.
km). Situated on the Caribbean coast, Sian Ka'an contains
numerous habitats: coral reefs, coastal dune vegetation, man-
groves, lowland dry tropical forests and rain forests. Sian
Ka'an provides costal habitats that are critical for migratory
birds and the endangered manatee.

El Cielo Biosphere Reserve in Tamaulipas (1300 sq. km).
This area is not shown on Map 21.1 or listed in Table 21.6
as it has not been assigned a category by lUCN. El Cielo is
one of the best preserved and richest cloud forests in
Mexico. Canopy trees are mostly temperate while orchids,
bromeliads and other epiphytes are tropical. At lower eleva-
tions, the vegetation is drier and includes nine species of
endangered cacti.

Sierra de Manantlan Biosphere Reserve in Jalisco (1395
sq. km). This area is not shown on Map 21.1 or listed in
Table 21.6 as it is in lUCN's category V. The reserve, estab-
lished in 1987, harbours a remarkable variety of habitats,
including large tracts of tropical seasonal forest and some of
western Mexico's northernmost montane tropical forest. It
contains an endemic population of the perennial corn Xea
diploperennis, one of the most important genetic and agricul-
tural discoveries of this century.

Sdiii-ces: The Nature Conservancy (1990): "WWF (1990):
SEDUE(1988).

able portion of the rain forest left in Mexico (see Box 2).
Calakmul is a projection into Mexico of Guatemala's Mayan
Biosphere Reserve, which contains the largest contiguous tract
of protected rain forest in the Peten.

Other important protected areas containing tropical forests
are the Sian Ka'an Biosphere Reserve, the El Triunfo
Biosphere Reserve and the Manantlan Biosphere Reserve (see
Box 2). Mangrove forest is amply represented, mostly in Ri'a
Celstun, Ria Lagartos and Pantanos de Centla (3027 sq. km in
Tabasco) Special Biosphere Reserves and in Sian Ka'an
Biosphere Reserve.

Conservation Initiatives

Programa de Accion Forestal Tropical (PRO AFT) is the current
version of the Mexican TFAP, the main objective of which is

Table 21.7 Area and percent of Mexico's forest formations in
conservation areas

Forest type

No.

ofCA'

rea in CA'

in CA'

Rain

12,170

12.5

Seasonal

870

0.5

Montane

210

Oak & Conifer

5,870

2.3

Numlwr of conservation areas (Flores-Villela and Gerez. 1989)

Area (sq. I<m) of eacti forest type contained in conservation areas (Alc^rreca cl at,

1988; Perez Gil and Jaramillu, 1992).

Percentage of present estimated forest cover in conservation areas.

the reduction of deforestation. The mission of PROAFT is to
provide SARH with a blueprint for a conservation/development
strategy for tropical forests. PROAFT is in the process of devel-
oping such a strategy using an approach that includes both field
projects and policy analysis. Field projects, called Alianzas
Tripartitas (AT), are structured as a collaboration between local
communities. SARH and NGOs (which include academic and
research institutions). The projects are on forest management,
wildlife use, reforestation, etc., and are designed as experimen-
tal approaches to resolving specific sets of conservation needs.
In contrast, policy analysis will focus on a larger scale and will
explore the impacts of the current institutional and legislative
framework determining resource use in tropical areas. The com-
bination of the lessons learned from the AT and the major find-
ings of the policy analyses should provide PROAFT with the
elements needed to make sound recommendations on concrete
actions that the federal government can take in its fight against
deforestation and resource degradation (PROAFT. 1991 ).

A new concept for the management of the Chimalapas area
in eastern Oaxaca is being developed which could provide
important lessons for the conservation of other areas in Mexico.
The Chimalapas area contains one of the largest expanses of
tropical moist forest in the country. It is considered a conserva-
tion priority by environmental groups, the federal government
and multilateral donors alike, but is not legally protected and is
threatened by deforestation (WWF, 1990). The main inhabitants
of the area are Zoque Indians. They have resisted invasion by
colonos and cattle ranchers and a variety of development pro-
grammes (Vocali'a Ejecutiva de los Chimalapas, 1990), and are

203

Mexico

not willing to have conservation imposed from the outside as a
"plan" to protect an endangered area of biological importance.
Instead, it is proposed that the area be managed as a Reserva
Campesina. Under this scheme, the inhabitants of the area
would be in charge of its conservation. Management of the

reserve would be conducted according to a plan that includes
the cultural and economic needs of the Zoques and that is
accepted and followed by all parties involved. The federal gov-
ernment has agreed to this concept and is in the process of
gazetting the new reserve.

References

Alcerreca, C Consejo. J. J., Flores. O.. Guitierrez, D..
Hentschell. E.. Herzig. M.. Perez-Gill. R.. Reyes, J.M. and
Sanchez-Cordero (1988). Fauna Silvestre y Areas Natitrales
Piotegidas. Uni verso Veintiuno. Mexico. 19.^ pp.

Almada, P. (1992). Identificacion de las Prioridades de
Coiisenacidn de la Zona Costera y Marina de Mexico para
el WWF. Internal Report. World Wildlife Fund. 21 pp.

Anaya, A.L., Consejo, J.J.. Gutierrez. D. and Hentschel. E.
(1992). Las Areas Naturales Protegidas en Mexico.

Collar, N.J.. Gonzaga, L.P., Krabbe. N., Madrofio Nieto. A..
Naranjo. L.G.. Parker III, T.A. and Wege. D.C. (1992).
Threatened Birds of the Americas. The ICBP/IUCN Red Data
Book. ICBP, Cambridge. U.K.

del Amo, S. (1991). Management of secondary vegetation for
the creation of useful rain forest in Uxpanapa, Veracruz,
Mexico. Pp. 343-350. In: Rain Forest Regeneration and
Management Gomez-Pompa, A.. Whitmore, T.C. and
Hadley. M. (eds). UNESCO.

Dirzo, R. ( 1992). Diversidad flori'stica y estado de conservacion
de las selvas tropicales de Mexico. Pp. 283-290. In: Mexico
ante los Retos de la Biodiversidad. Sarukhan. J. and Dirzo, R
(eds). Comision Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la
Biodiversidad, Mexico, D.F.

Eggen-Mclntosh, S.E., Borbolla Mufioz. E.B., Ornelas de Anda,
J.L., Zhu, Z. and Evans. D.L. (1992). Forest cover mapping
of Mexico using Advanced Very High Resolution
Radiometer Imagery. In: Mapping and Mmiitoring Global
Change. American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote
Sensing/American Congress on Surveying and
Mapping/Resource Technology "92 technical papers; 1992
August 3-8; Washington. DC.

Evans, D.L., Zhu, Z.. Eggen-Mclntosh. S.. Mayoral. P.G. and
Ornelas de Anda. J.L. (1992). Mapping Mexico's Forest
Lands with Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer.
UDSA Forest Service Research Note SO-367. 4 pp.

Fa, J.E. and Morales, L.M. (1993). Patterns of mammalian
diversity in Mexico. In: Biological Doiversity of Mexico:
Origins and Distribution. Ramamoorthy, T.P., Bye, R., Lot,
A. and Fa. J (eds). Oxford University Press, Oxford.

FAO (1988). An Interim Report on the State of Forest
Resources in the Developing Countries. FAO, Rome, Italy.

FAO ( 1993) Forest resources assessment 1990: Tropical coun-
tries. FAO Forestry Paper 1 12. FAO, Rome, Italy.

FAO (1994). FAO Yearbook: Forest Products 1981-1992. FAO
Forestry Series No. 27, FAO Statistics Series No. 1 1 6. FAO,
Rome, Italy.

Flores-Villela, O. and Gerez, P. (1989). Mexico's Living
Endowment: an Overview of Biological Diversitx .
Conservation International, 51 pp.

Galletti, H. and Arguelles. A. (1987). Planificacion estrategica
para el desarrollo rural: el caso del plan piloto forestal de
Quintana Roo. Pp. 317-320. In: Land and Resource
Evaluation for National Planning in the Tropics: an interna-
tional conference and workshop. U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service.
Gomez-Pompa, A. (1966). Estudios Botdnicos en la Region de

Misantla, Veracruz- Instituto Mexicano de Recursos

Naturales Renovables. Mexico. D.F. 173 pp.
Gomez-Pompa. A. ( 1990). El Problema de la deforestacion en el

tropico mexicano. Pp. 229-255. In: Medio Ambiente y

Desarrollo en Mexico, Vol. /. E. Leff (ed.). Centre de

Investigaciones Interdisciplinarias en Humanidades, UNAM.
Gomez-Pompa. A., Kaus, A., Jimenez, J., Brainbridge D. and

Rorive, V. (1993). Mexico: a case study. Pp. 483-548. In:

Sustainable Agriculture and the Environment in the Humid

Tropics. National Research Council. National Academy

Press. Washington. D.C. USA.
Gonzalez-Medrano, F. (1972). Bosque caducifolio. In: Gui'as

Botdnicas de Excnrsiones en Mexico. Sociedad Botanica de

Mexico. Mexico. D.F. 253 pp.
Groombridge. B. (Ed) (1993). 1994 lUCN Red List of

Threatened Animals. lUCN. Gland. Switzerland and

Cambridge, U.K. 286 pp.
Gutierrez Palacio, A. (1989). Conservacionismo y Desarrollo

del Recurso Forestal. Editorial Trillas, Mexico, D.F. 199 pp.
Holdridge, L.R., Grenke, W.H., Hatheway, W.H., Liang. T. and

Tosi, J. A. (1971). Forest Environment in Tropical Life

Zones: A Pilot Study. Pergamon Press. Oxford. 747 pp.
INEGI (1984). X Censo General de Pohlacion y Vivienda. 19S0.

Instituto Nacional de Estadi'stica Geografia e Informatica,

Mexico, D.F.
Jardel. P. (1985). Una revision cri'tica del metodo Mexicano de

ordenacion de bosques, desde el punto de vista de la ecologia

de poblaciones. Ciencia Forestal 10(58): 3-16.
Koeppen, W. (1948). Climatologia. Fondo de Cultura

Economica. Mexico. D.F. Pp. 478.
Lara, Y. (1991). El mercado de productos maderables en

Mexico. Hoja Informativa de Estudios Rurales y Aseson'a.

No. 4. Oaxaca, Mexico. 12 pp.
Lot. A. and Novelo, A. (1990). Forested wetlands of Mexico.

In: Ecosystems of the World 15: Forested Wetlands. Lugo.

A.E., Brinson, M. and Brown. S. (eds). Elsevier, Amsterdam.

Pp. 287-298.
Masera, O.. Ordonez, M.J. and Dirzo. R. (1992). Carbon

Emissions from Deforestation in Mexico: current situation

and long-term scenarios. Internal Report, Environmental

Protection Agency. 38 pp.
McNeely, J. A., Miller, K.R., Reid, W.V., Mittermeier, R.A.

and Werner. T.B. (1990). Conserving the World's

Biological Diversity. lUCN. WRI. CI. WWF-US. the World

Bank. 193 pp.
Merino. L. (1992). Contrastes en el sector forestal: Canada.

Estados Unidos y Mexico. El Cotidiano 48: 61-13.
Miranda, F. (1952). La Vegetacion de Chiapas. Vol I and II.

Gobierno de Chiapas, Mexico.
Miranda. F. and Hernandez. X. ( 1963). Los tipos de vegetacion

de Mexico y su clasificacion. Boletin de la Sociedad de

Botanica de Mexico 28: 29-179.

204

Mexico

Mittermeier. R. and Goettsch, C. (1992). La importancia de la
diversidad biologica de Mexico. Pp 63-74. In: Mexico ante
los Retos de la Biodiversidad. Sarukhan. J. and Dirzo, R.
(eds). Comision Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la
Biodiversidad, Mexico, D.F.

Morales, C. (1990). La ganaderizacion de Tabasco: reflejo de la
ineficiencia e irresponsabilidad empresarial en el
aprovechamienlo y manejo del tropico hiimedo mexicano.
Revista de Difiision Cientifica/Tecnologica y Hiiinani'stica I :

yi-A2.

Pennington. T. and Sarukhan, J. (1968). Arholes Tropicales de

Mexico. INIF-FAO. 413 pp.
Perez-Gil, R. and Jaramillo, F. (1992). Areas Naturales

Protegidas en Mexico. Informe para lUCN-BID. Internal

Report, lUCN. 56 pp.
PROAFT (1991). Programa de Accion Forestal Tropical:

Hacia iin Programa Nacional a Largo Plazo. Subsecretari'a

Forestal. SARH. Mexico, D.F. 21 pp.
Ramamoorthy. T.P., Bye, R., Lot, A. and Fa. J. (1993).

Biological Diversity of Mexico: Origins and Distribution.

Oxford University Press, Oxford. 812 pp.
Richards, E. (1992). The Forest Ejidos of South-east Mexico: a

case study of participatory natural forest management. Rural

Development Forestry Network, Overseas Development

Institute. 28 pp.
Rodriguez. C. (1958). Discusion de Formulas para el Cdlculo

de la Productividad Maderable y Exposicion del Metodo

Mexicano de Ordenacion de Monies de Especies Coniferas.

Comision Forestal del Estado de Michoacan, Morelia.

Michoacan, Mexico.
Rzedowski, J. ( 1978). Vegetacion de Mexico. Limusa. 432 pp.
Rzedowski, J. (1991a). El endemismo en la flora fanerogamica

Mexicana: una apreciacion anali'tica preliminar. Acta

Botdnica Mexiccma 15: 47-64.
Rzedowski, J. (1991b). Diversidad y origenes de la flora

fanerogamica de Mexico. Acta Botdnica Mexicana 14: 3-2 1 .
Rzedowski, J. (1992). Diversidad del universe vegetal de

Mexico. Pp. 251-258. In: Mexico Ante los Retos de la

Biodiversidad. Sarukhan. J. and Dirzo, R. (eds). Comision

Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad.

Mexico, D.F.
Rzedowski. J. ( 1993). Diversity and origins of the phanerogamic

flora of Mexico. In: Biological Diversity of Mexico: Origins

and Distribution. Ramamoorthy. T.P., Bye. R.. Lot, A. and

Fa, J. (eds). Oxford University Press. Oxford. Pp. 129-144.
SARH (1971). Mapa de Tipos de Vegetacion de la Repiiblica

Mexicana. Secretaria de Agricultura y Recursos Hidraulicos.

Mexico.
SARH (1991). Inventario Nacional Forestal de Gran Vision.

Reporte Principal. Subsecretari'a Forestal, Mexico. D.F.
SARH (1992a). Mexico 1991-1992 — Inventario Nacional

Forestal de Gran Vision: Reporte Principal. Secretaria de

Agricultura y Recursos Hidraulicos. Subsecretaria Forestal.
SARH (1992b). Reforma a la Ley Forestal: Estado Actual de

los Recursos Forestales de Mexico. Internal Document,

Secretaria de Agricultura y Recursos Hidraulicos. 40 pp.
Sedjo, R. (1992). Forestry in North America: Opportunities and

Challenges in the Face of a Free Trade Agreement. Internal

Report, World Wildlife Fund. 7 pp.
SEDUE ( 1988). Informacion Bdsica Sobre las Areas Protegidas

de Mexico. Internal Report, Direccion General de

Conservacion Ecologica de los Recursos Naturales. 77 pp.
Snook-Cosandey. L. (1986). La Problemdtica Forestal de

Mexico: Oportunidades y Limitantes para el Desarrollo.

Internal Report, CONACYT/ONUDI. 52 pp.
Snook, L. (1992). Opportunities and constraints for sustainable

tropical forestry: lessons from the Plan Piloto Forestal.

Quintana Roo. Mexico. Pp. 65-84. In: Proceedings of the

Humid Tropical Lowlands Conference. Ford, L. (ed.).

Development Strategies for Fragile Lands. USAID.

Washington, D.C.
The Nature Conservancy (1990). Parks in Peril: A

Consenation Partnership for the Americas. 23 pp.
Toledo, V. (1988). La diversidad biologica de Mexico. Ciencia

y Desarrollo 81: 19-30.
Toledo. V. (1990). El Proceso de Ganaderizacion y la

Destruccion Biologica y Ecologica de Mexico, pp. 191—227.

In: Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo en Mexico. Vol. I. Leff. E.

(ed.). Centro de Investigaciones Interdisciplinarias en

Humanidades. UNAM.
Toledo, v.. Carabias. J., Toledo. C. and Gonzalez-Pacheco. C

(1989). La Produccion Rural en Mexico: Alternativas

Ecologicas. Universo Veintiuno. 402 pp.
Tudela. F. (1989). Los "Hijos Tontos"" de la planeacion: los

grandes planes en el tropico hiimedo Mexicano. In: Una

Decada de Planeacion Urbano-Regional en Mexico.

1978^1988. Garza, G. (ed.). El Colegio de Mexico,

Mexico, D.F.
Vocali'a Ejecutiva de los Chimalapas (1990). Tequio por

Chimalapas. Gobiemo del Estado de Oaxaca, Mexico. Pp. 243.
WWF (1990). Environmentally-sound Commimity Development

around Key Protected Areas in South-eastern Mexico.

Internal Report. World Wildlife Fund. 25 pp.
Yanez-Arancibia. A. and Lara. A. (1993). Ecosistemas de

manglar en America tropical: estructura. funcion y manejo.

EPOMEX, Serie CientiTica 2. Campeche, Mexico. Pp. 300.

Author: Dr Guillermo Castilleja. WWF-US. with contributions
from David Evans and Susan Eggen-Mclntosh. USDA/Southem
Forest Experiment Station. New Orleans.

Map 21.1 Mexico

Data from the Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) were used in a pro-
gramine sponsored by the LfS Department of Agricuhure. Forest Service and FAG to help scien-
tists from Mexico generate forest-cover maps of Mexico (Evans el at. 1 992; Eggen-Mclntosh el
at. 1992),

Near-cloud-free composite images were generated from .AVHRR Local Area Coverage
data.seLs for 1990 and 1991. Supporting information from 1:1 million vegetation maps. Landsat
TM prints and aerial photographs was also incoporated. Physiographic regions were stratified
and classified separately to reduce spectral variance. Regional classifications were combined to
produce the final map. These data were kindly made available to WCMC by David Evans and
Susan Eggen-Mclntosh of the Southern Forest Experiment Station of the US Forest Service.
The resulting Map 21. 1, however, gives only an approximation of the distribution and areas of
the different forest types, as areas of disturbed and fragmented forests were included on the
original dataset and were not distinguished as such. Map 21.1 cannot, therefore, be used to take
measurements of the amount of forest remaining in the country.

On Map 2 1 . 1 . the temperate jitrest in the original dataset is shown a.s pine forest; tropical
high (> 30 m in height i and inedittiii 115 to 30 m in height) forest is shown as lowland moist and
montane forest (delimited by a 3(XX)* contour taken from the Digital Chart of the World); tropi-
cal low (< 15 m in height: dr)') forest is shown as dry forest; all other nonforested land as non-
forest; and clouds as cloud cover. Note that the pine forest on Map 21.1 is. in reality, a mixture
of conifer {Finns, Abies, etc.) and broadleaved species, especially oak {Qnercits spp.) and
Liqtddambar. Mangroves are not shown on Map 21.1.

Boundary data for the conservation areas were provided by Conservation International v^ith
additional material taken from the WCMC protected areas database.

205

22 Nicaragua

Country area 130,000 sq. km

Land area 1 18,750 sq km

Population (mid-1 994) 4 3 million

Population growth rate 2 9 per cent

Population projected to 2025 9 1 million

Gross national product per capita (1992) USS410

Forest cover in 1990 (see Map) 57,450 sq, km

Forest cover in 1 990 (FAO, 1 993a) 60, 1 30 sq km

Annual deforestation rate (1981-1990) 19 per cent

Industrial roundvKood production 300,000 cu m

Industrial roundwood exports —

Fuelvifood and charcoal production 3,265.000 cu m

Processed wood production 85,000 cu m

Processed wood exports 1 000 cu m

i . N

Nicaragua is the largest of the countries on the Central American isthmus and has the greatest percentage and total area
of intact ecosystems in the region. Its rain forest is the largest north of the Amazon.

The country has been war-torn and subjected to an international blockade until recently and during this time interna-
tional assistance for conservation activities was extremely limited. However this situation has now improved and some
major projects are planned.

Introduction

Nicaragua, a country of lakes, rivers and volcanoes, is located in
the middle of the Central American isthmus. It is the largest of
the seven countries in the region, with appro.ximately 480 km of
Caribbean coastline and 350 km of Pacific coastline. It can be
divided into three main topographical regions. The Pacific
region is a broad lowland belt, about 80 km in width, which
runs along the Pacific coast from the Gulf of Fonesca in the
north to Costa Rica in the south. This comparatively dry region
contains the Central Depression and associated rift lakes and a
chain of \ olcanoes, many of them active. The highest is Volcan
Cristobal at 1806 m. The Central Highland region is dominated
by three ranges, the Cordillera Segoviana, the Cordillera
Isabelia and the Cordillera Dariense, all running east to west.
The elevation of this area is between 600 m and 2150 m
(Sutton, 1989). The third area is the Caribbean lowlands, a
largely uninhabited region of humid lowland forest and pine
savanna that occupies about half the country.

The west has a mean temperature of about 27°C, a rainy sea-
son between May and November and a dry season from
December to April: annual rainfall is 2000 mm or less. The cen-
tral highland area is cooler with a longer, but lighter, rainy sea-
son. The climate in the east is tropical, it is generally hot and
humid throughout the year. Mean annual precipitation in this
region is nearly 4000 mm, with a nine month rainy season and
no well defined dry period (Sutton, 1989).

The estimated population of Nicaragua is 4.3 million, giving
an overall population density of 36 people per sq. km. However,
the Pacific region, occupying only 15 per cent of the land area,
contains over 60 per cent of the population, leaving the Central
and Caribbean regions with densities as low as five inhabitants
per sq. km. The Central Highland area is settled chietly by sub-
sistence and commercial farmers. Most settlement in the
Caribbean lowland is confined to coastal towns and mining
areas. About 62 per cent of the population are urban inhabitants,
the biggest town is the capital Managua with around 700.000

inhabitants. The people are mainly mestizo, but there are also
some Afroamericans, on the Caribbean coast, and a small num-
ber of Amerindians.

The country is divided into nine politico-administrative
regions. Two of them are autonomous, due to their special eth-
nic and socio-cultural characteristics. These are the Region
Autonoma del Atlantico Norte (RAAN — the Autonomous
Region of the Northern Atlantic) and the Region Autonoma del
Atlantico Sur (RAAS — the Autonomous Region of the
Southern Atlantic). Civil war, as well as a trade and aid em-
bargo imposed by the U.S.A., has caused considerable disrup-
tion of the country's economy. Nicaragua's GNP per capita is
one of the lowest in the Americas. Agriculture is the principal
source of income for the nation. The main exports are cotton,
coffee, meat, sugar and bananas.

The Forests

Nicaragua contains mostly lowland tropical broadleaved forests,
but there are some patches of cloud forest, some important pine
forests and a few fragments of dry forest remaining in the coun-
try, as well as areas of mangrove and some swamp forest.

Many of the forests in the moderately warm and humid zones
of the lowlands, below 500 m asl, have already been exploited
as access to them is easy and they have a wealth of commercial
timber species. The remnants of these forests are found as iso-
lated patches in small intermontane valleys. Some of the species
that characterize the forests are guachipilin Diphysa rahinioides,
guanacaste or ear fruit Enterolobium cyclocarpum and geni'zero
or raintree Pilhecellobiiim soman.

The evergreen forests at slightly higher elevations (500-
1500 m) have also mostly been cleared, and replaced with cof-
fee plantations and livestock pastures, or have suffered from
exploitation. The only large extensions left are located in the
most isolated areas of the departments of Matagalpa and
Jinotega. Some of the species that characterize this type of for-

206

Nicaragua

est are: kapok tree Ceiha pentandra. palm or giant fern Cyathea
chnoodes and the oak Quercus oleoides.

Extensive areas of tall evergreen forests are found in the
Caribbean lowlands in areas with the highest precipitation
(2730-6000 mm). They occur at altitudes lower than 1000 m in
moderately cool and humid conditions. These are a multistoried
formation, the tallest trees reach or surpass 30 m and their thick
foliage is sometimes entangled with gigantic lianas. Species
characteristic of this wetter evergreen forest type include cedro
macho Carapa guianensis, palo de agua Vochysis lioiu/iirensis
and guayabon Tenninalia oblonga.

Cloud forests occur at elevations over 1500 m. They are
more or less limited to the permanently clouded tops of the vol-
canic cones in the Pacific coast and to the tops of the great
mountain massifs such as the Mogoton. Misiin, Kilambe and
Penas Blancas. These forests are home to species such as santa
man'a Calophyllum brasilensis, sangredrago Croton panamensis
and majagua Heliocarpiis appendiciilatus.

Swamp forests are periodically or permanently flooded with
fresh water. Characteristic species include Bravaisia iiiteger-
rinia. river willow Scilix humboldtiana and the dog almond
Andira inermis. These are found throughout the Caribbean
coastal region.

The pine forests are characteristic of the high and moderately
dry lands from the north of Nicaragua, mainly the department of
Nueva Segovia. They typically occur between 400 and 700 m in
well-drained areas. The best conserved samples of this ecosys-
tem are the pinewoods of Dipilito. which contain species such
as Pinus oocarpa. P. maximinoi and P. patula teciiniiinanii. In
addition, pine savannas occur on low, flat lands such as those in
the north of the Caribbean region. These are primarily grass-
lands with scattered Pinus caribaea in different associations and
transitions with broadleaved species. The pine savannas is a
fire-caused disclimax. whereas the true climax vegetation is
evergreen rain forest of tropical lowlands (Sutton. 1989).

Tropical dry forests are medium to low forests of deciduous
and semi-deciduous trees. They occur at altitudes lower than
500 m in warm and dry zones. Temperatures are over 26°C and
annual rainfall ranges from 1000 to 1200 mm. The last remnants
of these forests are located in isolated zones of the Pacific
region. Some of the species that characterize them are escobillo
Phyllostylon brasiliensis. lignum vitae Giiaiacum sanctum and
Haematoxylum brasiletto.

Mangroves

The mangroves in Nicaragua are more extensive and less
degraded on the Caribbean coast than on the Pacific coast. In
1981, FAO/UNEP reported that they covered an area of 600 sq.
km and this same figure is given in Saenger el al. (1983). On
Map 22.1, the mangroves are shown covering the much larger
area of 1718 sq. km. though 772 sq. km of these are degraded.

These forests contain Rhizophora mangle, Laguncularia
racemosa and Avicennia germinans. The estuaries and marshes
of the Caribbean coast are the northern boundary of the natural
distribution of the mangrove species Pelliciera rhizophorae in
the Caribbean slope.

Forest Resources and Management

In 1950, there were 70,000 sq. km of forest in Nicaragua.
However, the rapid deforestation of the past four decades has
reduced this area considerably to 43,000 sq. km. Broadleaved
forests cover 38,000 sq. km, while conifer forests occupy the
remaining 5000 sq. km (IRENA, 1992). More than 10,000 sq.

Table 22.1

Estimate

s of forest extent

in Nicaragua

Forest type

Area (sq. km)

% land area

Lowland

moist"

30,086

25.3

Montane

6,289

5.3

Pine+

11,284

9.5

Dry

2,509

2.1

Swamp

5,564

4.9

Mangrove*

1,718

1.4

Total

57,450

48.4

includes 1.645 sq. km aftecled by Hurricane Joan in 1988
+ includes areas of pine savanna

includes 772 sq km of degraded mangrove

Based on analysis of Map 22. 1 . See Map legend on p. 2 1 1 for details of sources.

km of the broadleaved forests are degraded, mostly due to
shifting cultivation occurring in them (IRENA, 1992). The
dense broadleaved forests occur mainly in the autonomous
regions of the Atlantic coast (RAAN and RAAS), while the
conifer forests are principally found in the northeast of the
RAAN and in Nueva Segovia. The pine forests are also mostly
degraded, due both to frequent forest fires and to logging
(IRENA, 1992). FAO (1993a) estimates (using a 1979 survey
as a baseline) that there are 60.130 sq. km of forest in the coun-
try — none of this is considered to be dry deciduous forest. The
figure given for closed broadleaved forest by FAO (1993a) is
47,380 sq. km.

The areas of the different forest types shown on Map 22. 1 are
given in Table 22.1. The total of 57,450 sq. km is certainly not
pristine closed canopy forest; it includes 772 sq. km of degraded
mangrove as well as an unknown area of pine savanna. The
source for Map 22.1 was a dye-line map produced by the
Nicaraguan Institute of Natural Resources and the Environment
(IRENA) in 1991, which was based on a 1983 land-use map
(see Map Legend).

The forestry sector does not have a specific governing insti-
tution. Forest activities are carried out by two units of IRENA,
the National Forest Service (regulation and control) and a State
Forestry Administration (for State forest lands). Neither of them
have regional branches (FAO, 1993b). Other institutions
involved with forest activities in Nicaragua are the Forest Seeds
Bank (BSF — Banco de Semillas Forestales), the National
Technical Institute for Forestry (INTECFOR — Instituto
Nacional Tecnico Forestal) and the National Agricultural
University (UNA — Universidad Nacional Agraria).
Implementation of the existing laws and regulations concerning
forests has been inefficient.

Nicaragua has around 25,000 sq. km of tree-less land which
is potentially suitable for forestry. About half of this area
(12,000 sq. km) is considered to be highly productive and all of
it could be reforested for the production of goods and services
for national consumption and for export.

Forestry does not play a substantial direct role in the coun-
try's economy: it represents approximately 0.2 per cent of the
GNP, and its exports yielded a total of US$1.5 million in 1989,
which correspond to only 0.5 per cent of the country's exports
for that year. According to FAO (1994), no industrial round-
wood was exported, while only 85,000 cu. m of processed wood
was exported in 1992. Most tree felling is not for commercial
purposes, but is a result of slash-and-burn agriculture. The

207

Nicaragua

Map 22.1 Nicaragua

Forests

Lowland moist

' Conservation areas

Monlane
S*amp

' Non torest

Mangrove

Degraded mangrove
Pine

S^^^^'^^sSN

Dry

1:2.620,000

208

Nicaragua

forestry sector does, however, play an important indirect role in
the economy. It provides some 50,000 cu. m of wood for house
building and 27,000 cu. m for the mining industry, as well as
providing about 90 per cent of the fuel used for domestic pur-
poses and 25 per cent of that used in industry. In addition, there
are over 250 timber factories and furniture shops creating
employment for numerous people.

The primary transformation industry has some 90 sawmills
and one plywood factory. The secondary transformation indus-
try is made up of seven medium-scale companies and 800 craft
shops with capacity to process 6000 - 12.000 cu. m of sawn
wood. The main products are furniture, floorboards and pre-fab-
ricated houses. The capacity of the transformation industry is in
the order of 300,000 cu. m, but the processing plants are obso-
lete and are not well maintained so only 60 per cent of this
capacity is used.

Deforestation

Much of the deforestation in Nicaragua has occurred over the
last few decades; most of it the result of clearing the forests to
use the land for other purposes, rather than as result of the com-
mercial or noncommercial demand for timber (Leonard, 1987).
In the 1950s and 1960s, the land area planted with cotton
quadrupled and forests were cleared to make way for this
expansion (Nietschmann, 1990). In the 1960s and 1970s, clear-
ing for cattle ranches was the main cause of deforestation.

Between the years of 1952 and 1984, annual deforestation in
Nicaragua varied between 950 sq. km and 1250 sq. km. It
decreased during the period of the war (1985-1990). but it
increased again in 1991, as a consequence of the thousands of
returning refugees clearing and colonising areas of the forest.
Today, it is estimated that the annual rate is between 1500 and
2000 sq. km (IRENA. 1992). FAO (1993a) estimates that,
between 1981 and 1990, 1240 sq. km of forest were cleared
each year, an annual rate of 1.9 per cent.

The direct and indirect causes of deforestation are numer-
ous, complex and interrelated. The main direct cause is the
conversion of forest land to agricultural land. This occurs
because of the lack of options for the economic use of the for-
est resources, the low productivity of the land farmed by the
campesinos. the absence of appropriate technology to increase
productivity and the unstable land tenure situation. In addition,
production systems which are unsuitable for the country's trop-
ical soils are used; there are few or no well managed credit
programmes for campesinos. there is a lack of coordination
between the institutions controlling agricultural and forestry
matters, an absence of operating capacity within these institu-
tions and inappropriate economic and financial policies are
applied to the problems.

Problems are also caused by the general lack of awareness
for the need to use the forest in a sustainable manner, the lack of
interest in medium and long-term investments (as opposed to
short-term ones) and the fact that little value is attached to the
social and economic advantages of good forest management.

As well as the deforestation caused by the conversion to agri-
cultural land, a considerable degree of degradation of the forests
is caused by the amount of wood cut for fuel. Every year, 3.5
million cu. m of firewood are cut to be used in homes, industries
and commerce; wood provides 49 per cent of Nicaragua's ener-
gy requirements.

IRENA estimate that the 170 mph winds of Hurricane Joan
in 1988 damaged one fifth of the country's forest wealth, with
losses in timber alone amounting to US$1.6 billion.

Biodiversity

Nicaragua is part of the Biological Province of Central America,
where South American and North American elements intermin-
gle. The flora is characterized by a large number of Cactaceae
and Bromelaceae and there are also over 800 species from the
Orchidaceae family. In a recent publication. IRENA (1992)
reports that more than 9000 plant species have been identified in
Nicaragua and that there are probably an additional 4000 to
5000 species not yet discovered.

In spite of being the largest country on the Central American
isthmus, Nicaragua has a somewhat lower biological diversity
than its neighbouring countries. This is due primarily to its lack
of altitudinal diversity and absence of high isolated mountain
ranges (Cedefio et al.. 1992). For the same reasons, endemism
rates are also lower. Only two per cent of the vertebrate fauna
and 0.6 per cent of the flora are endemic.

There are reported to be 750 bird species and 200 mammal
species in the country. Numbers of amphibians and reptiles are
59 and 161 respectively (WCMC. 1992).

Nicaragua contains only two bird species listed as threatened
by Collar et al. (1992). These are the golden-cheeked warbler
Dendroica chrysoparia, which over-winters in the country's
forests, and the keel-billed motmot Electron carinatum, a low-
land forest species with a very patchy distribution throughout
most of Central America.

Globally threatened mammal species that occur in the coun-
try include the olingos Bassaricyon gabbii and B. sumichrasti,
the tiger cat Leopardiis tigriiuis, the margay L, wiedii. the tapir
Tapirus bairdii. Geoffrey's spider monkey Ateles geojfroyi and
the giant anteater Myrmecopliaga Iridactyla (Groombridge,
1993). Most of these are forest dwellers. Other than the five
marine turtles, the only threatened reptiles reported to occur in
Nicaragua are the American crocodile Crocodyhis aciitus and
the narrow-bridged mud turtle Kinosternoti angusipons
(Groombridge, 1993).

The country's most important areas for biodiversity are: the
San Cristobal-Casita volcanic complex, the Masaya Volcano
National Park, the Zapatera Archipelago, the Ri'o Escalante-
Chococente. the BOSAWAS, the Saslaya hill, the Solentiname
Archipelago, the Ri'o Indio Maiz. the Cayos Miskitos and Los
Guatusos. All of these sites are conservation areas.

Conservation Areas

Nicaragua's first protected area, a wildlife refuge, was estab-
lished in 1958 and its first national park (Saslaya) was declared
in 1971. However, with no national policy to support their pro-
tection, these areas were largely ineffectual (Cedefio et al..
1992). It was only when the Sandinista government came to
power in 1979 that IRENA was formed. This was the first
Nicaraguan institute concerned with the protection of the envi-
ronment to be created. Also in 1979. a National Parks Service
(SPN) was formed within IRENA which was specifically
responsible for establishing and managing protected areas. The
intensification of the civil war and the economic crisis after
1983 meant that IRENA could barely function and it was funher
weakened in 1988 when it lost its ministerial status and became
a department within the Ministry of Agricultural Development
and Agrarian Reform. It regained its status after the change of
government in 1990 but its activities are still constrained by
lack of money (Utting. 1993).

In 1983, 17 new conservation areas were created and a fur-
ther 45 in 1991. most designated as nature reserves. In 1990. a
decree formalised the creation of a network of protected areas

209

Nicaragua

Table 22.2 Conservation areas in Nicaragua

Existing conservation areas in lUCN's categories I-IV. For informa-
tion on World Heritage Sites see Chapter 8.

Area (sq. km)

150

Map Ref

National Parks

Archipelago Zapatera

Saslaya*

Volcan Masaya*

Biological Reserves
Cayos Miskitos+

4 Rio Indio Maiz*

Wildlife Refuges

5 Los Guatusos*

6 Ri'o Escalantes-Chococente*

Generic Resene

7 Yucul*

Nalural Reserves

8 Alamikamba*

9 Apante

10 Cabo Viejo*

1 1 Cerro Bana Cruz*

12 Cerro Cola Blanca*

13 Cerro Cumaica - Cerro Alegre

14 Cerro Datanii - El Diablo

15 Cerro Kliambe*

16 Cerro Kuskawas*

17 Cerro Mambachito La Vieja

18 Cerro Musun*

19 Cerro Paucasan

20 Cerro Quiabuc (Las Brisas)

21 Cerro Tisey - Estanzuela*

22 Complejo Volcanico Momotombo

y Momotombito*

23 Complejo Volcanico Pilas - El Hoyo*

24 Complejo Volcanico San Cristobal*

25 Complejo Volcanico Telica - Rota*

26 Cordillera de Yolaina*

27 Cordillera Dipilto y Jalapa*

28 Delta del Estero Real*

29 Estero Padre Ramos*

500
2,950

438
48

101

222

101

85
74
180
91
400
412
550

Map Ret

Area (sq. km)

Fila Cerro Frio • La Cumpilda

Fila MasigUe

Guahule

Isia Juan Venado*

Kligna*

Laguna de Asosoca

Laguna Bismuna-Raya*

118

Laguna de Apoyo

Laguna de Mecatepe

Laguna de Nejapa

Laguna de Pahara*

102

Laguna de Tiscapa

0.4

Laguna de Tisma

103

Laguna Kukalaya*

Laguna Layasica*

Laguna Tala - Sulamas*

314

Laguna Yulu Karata*

253

Limbaika*

Llanos de Karawala*

Macizos de Pefias Blancas

113

Makantaka*

Mesas de Monopotente

Peninsula de Chiltepe*

Ri'o Manares

Salto Ri'o Yasica

0.4

Sierra Amerrisque

121

Sierra Kiragua*

Tepesomoto/Pataste*

Volcan Concepcion*

Volcan CosigUina*

124

Volcan Madera*

Volcan Mombacho*

Volcan Yali*

Yulu*

National Monument

Archipielago de Solentiname

189

Total

9,049.8

* area with forest within its boutidaries as stiown on Map 22. 1
+ not mapped

Source: WCMC Uinpuhlished data)

in the south-eastern region on the border with Costa Rica.
These comprise the Nicaraguan component of the International
System of Protected Areas for Peace (Sistema Internacional de
Areas Protegidas para la Paz) known as SI-A-PAZ which was
first proposed in 1974 (Castiglione, 1990). This system is
about 3370 sq. km in extent. Several other areas have been
designated since then, the largest (7300 sq. km) being
BOSAWAS, a national natural resource reserve in the north of
the country (lUCN category Vlll). Overall, many significant
protected area policies and programmes are being initiated in
the country.

There is no single unifying law that gives definitions of the
management categories of protected areas used in Nicaragua
(lUCN, 1992). Table 22.2 shows the country's protected areas
in lUCN categories I-IV.

Conservation Initiatives

The problems faced by Nicaragua's forest sector are worsening,
and this has motivated the Government to support the imple-
mentation of the Tropical Forestry Plan. In Nicaragua, the latter
received the name of ECOT-PAF (Estrategia Nacional de
Desarrollo Sostenible, Ordenamiento Territorial y Plan de
Accion Forestal) (National Strategy for the Sustainable
Development, Territorial Zoning and Action Plan for Forestry).
This plan was financed by the Swedish Authority for Inter-
national Development, under the supervision of IRENA, with
the collaboration of several governmental institutions, espe-
cially the Ministry of Economy and Development (MEDE) and
the Nicaraguan Institute for Territorial Studies (INETER).

The National Forestry Action Plan, completed in June 1992,
includes a detailed analysis of the forestry sector, an identifica-

210

Nicaragua

tion of the main issues and basic conditions needed for the
development of the forestry sector (FAO, 1993b). The second
part of the plan includes a set of policies, objectives and strate-
gies for the sector, followed by a short-term action plan, details
of financial arrangements and the expected results and benefits.
A regional forestry action plan has been prepared for two

an effort to develop these two areas which had been particularly
badly affected by the civil war and by Hurricane Joan (FAO,
1993b).

The National Forestry Action Plan was inserted in the
National Strategy for Conservation and Sustainable
Development and the Environmental Action Plan for Nicaragua,

regions of the country — RAAS and Region V. This was part of which was completed in June 1993.

References

Castiglione, J. (1990). SI-A-PAZ en 1990, Recursos suplemento

especial: SI-A-PAZ. lUCN, Gland. Switzerland.
Cedefio, V,, Cedeno J. and Barborak, J. (1992). Country Report

on Nicaragua. Unpublished draft.
Collar. N.J., Gonzaga, L.P.. Krabbe. N., Madrofio Nieto. A..

Naranjo, L.G., Parker III, T.A. and Wege, D.C. (1992).

Threatened Birds of the Americas. The ICBP/IUCN Red Data

Book. ICBP, Cambridge, U.K.
FAO (1993a). Forest resource assessment 1990: tropical coun-
tries. FAO Forestry Paper 1 12. FAO, Rome, Italy.
FAO (1993b). TFAP Update 30. FAO, Rome, Italy.
FAO ( 1994). FAO Yearbook: Forest Products 1981-1992. FAO

Forestry Series No. 27, FAO Statistics Series No. 1 16. FAO,

Rome. Italy.
FAO/UNEP (1981). Proyecto de Evaluacion de los Recursos

Forestales Tropicales: Los Recursos Forestales de la

America Tropical. FAO, Rome, Italy.
Groombridge, B. (Ed) (1993). 1994 lUCN Red List of

Threatened Animals. lUCN. Gland. Switzerland and

Cambridge, U.K. 286 pp.
IRENA (1992). Plan de Accion Forestal: Documento Base.

IRENA-ECOT-PAF. Managua, Nicaragua.
lUCN (1992). Protected Areas of the World: A review of

national systems. Volume 4: Nearctic and Neotropical.

lUCN. Gland. Switzerland and Cambridge. U.K.
Leonard. H.J. (1987). Natural Resources and Economic

Development in Central America. A Regional Enviroivnental

Profile. International Institute for Environment and

Development. Transaction Books. Oxford, U.K.
Nietschmann, B. (1990). Conservation by conflict in Nicaragua.

Natural Hi.story 11: 42-48.
Saenger. P.. Hegerl. E.J. and Davie, J.D.S. (1983). (eds). Global

Status of Mangrove Ecosystems. Commission on Ecology

Papers No. 3. lUCN, Gland. Switzerland.

Sutton. S.Y. (1989). Nicaragua. In: Floristic Inventory of
Tropical Countries: the status of plant systematics. collec-
tions, and vegetation plus recommendations for the Future.
Campbell. D.G. and Hammond. D. (eds). New York
Botanical Garden. New York. Pp. 299-304.

Utting. P. (1993). Trees, people and power. Earthscan
Publications Ltd. London.

WCMC (1992). Global Biodiversity: Status of the Earth's
Living Resources. Chapman and Hall. London xx -I- 594 pp.

Author: Roberto Araquistain. Director Forestal SFN-IRENA.
Managua, Nicaragua.

Map 22.1 Nicaragua

The forest eover data shown on Map 22.1 have been digitised from a dyeline map entitled
Eslado Acltuil de la Vegeracion Forestal de Nicaragua. The source map, dated 1991, is based
on an earlier land-use map of 1983, and has been prepared at a scale of 1:1 million by the
Instituto Nicaraguense de Recursos Naturales y del Ambiente. Direccion de Adminislracion de
Bosques Nacionales.

The source data are grouped into five broad categories: Bosque Denso. Bosque Claro.
Malorrai Usa Agropecuario and Otros. These are further sub-divided into more specifically
defined vegetation types.

The source data have been harmonised for this atlas in the following way: Bosque deuso trop-
ica} ombroftlo (pluvial) de baja allitud. Zana afectada por el Huracan Juana. and Bosque claro
latifoliado semper\'irenle are shown as lowland and montane rain forest (deliminted by 3000'
contour taken from the Digital Chart of the World) — Bosque claro latifoliado sempen'irente.
which occurs in the previous northern "war zone', has been included on the advice of J.
Castiglione (pers. comm., 1991); Bosque denso tropical ombroftlo fpluvial) de pantano is
shown as inland swamp forest; Bosque claro de pino de tierras alias and Bosque claro de pino
de tierras bajas as pine forest; Bosque de nian^lares as mangroves; Bosque claro sempen'irente
de manglures y tierras pantanosas de manglares sin vegetacion arborescente is shown as
degraded mangrove; and Bosque claro itiayormeme deciduo por la seqitia as dry forest.

Conservation areas have been extracted from a dyeline map: Nicaragua — Sistema Nacional
de Areas Silvestres Prolegidas. compiled by the Servicio de Parques Nacionales. Managua,
Nicaragua, and published in 1992 by the Instituto de Ambiente y los Recursos Naturales
(IRENA) at a scale of 1:500.000,

211

23 Panama

Country oreo 77,080 sq km

land area 75,990 sq km

Population (mid-l 994) 2 5 million

. — . .

Population growth rote 1 8 per ccnl

Population projected to 2025 3 9 million

Gross notional product per capita (1992) USS2440

■c?^

Forest cover for 1990 (FAO, 1993) 31,1 70 sq km

Annual deforestation rote (1981-1990) 19 per cent

Industrial roundwood production 1 1 8,000 cu m

■ "-p.

Industrial roundwood exports 1000 cu m

Fuelwood and charcoal production 91 0,000 cu. m

Processed wood production 58,000 cu. m
Processed wood exports —

^--^ i

Panama has a greater number of vertebrate species than any other country in Central America. However, forest cover in
the country has declined from around 70 per cent to 40 per cent over the last 44 years and there is bound to be a con-
current reduction in the country's biodiversity. Preoccupation at all levels of government with economic issues and the
need for development have, until recently, made conservation a low priority in the country.

Introduction

Topographically the country comprises four regions: western
Panama, which is dominated by the Cordillera de Talamanca
that extends down from Costa Rica in a southeasterly direction;
the central lowlands, bisected by the Panama Canal; the eastern
region, characterised by a series of coastal ranges; and the nar-
row lowlands on the Caribbean coast. Elevations range from sea
level to 3427 m. but most of the isthmus has an elevation of less
than 500 m. and nearly 90 per cent is less than 1000 m high
(Porter, 1973).

Mean monthly temperature is about 27°C. with lilllc change
throughout the year. The Pacific rainfall regime consists of a
seven month rainy season with a five month dry season from
December to April. In contrast, the narrow Caribbean slope and
lowlands have two wet seasons — in .lune/July and
November/December and two less wet periods in
September/October and February/March. Rainfall is higher on
the north side of the isthmus so that, for instance, Panama City
receives an annual precipitation of 1770 mm while Colon has
3175 mm.

Overall population density in Panama is around 33 people
per sq. km. However. 50 per cent of the inhabitants are concen-
trated in the cities of Panama and Colon and along the length of
the Canal route, while other areas of the country are much less
densely populated (INRENARE. 1990). The official language is
Spanish and this is spoken by about 80 per cent of the popula-
tion, about 14 per cent speak Creole English. About 60 per cent
of the people are mestizo or mulatto, only eight per cent are
Amerindians.

The principal agricultural exports are coffee, bananas and
sugar. Agriculture produces 10 per cent of GNP while the
forestry sector represents only one per cent of GNP
(INRENARE. 1990).

The Forests

There are lowland forests, with high rainfall, along the
Caribbean side of Panama and more seasonal, deciduous forests
along the Pacific side of the country. Some swamp forest occurs

in the Darien lowlands and there is montane forest in the
uplands.

The Darien lowlands in eastern Panama, which are in
Holdridge's tropical moist life zone, are dominated by cuipo
Caivanillesia planlifolia trees which may reach 40 m in height
(Harsthorn. 1981). Other dominant emergent trees are
Anacardiiiin e.xcelsiim and Ceiba pentandra. with Boinbacopsis
quinata. B. sessilis. Enterolobium cyclocarpum. Licania
hypoleuca, Platypodium elegans, Terminalia amazonia and
Vitex cymosa occurring frequently in the canopy. Palms such as
Sabal allenii are commonly found in the subcanopy. Epiphytes
are scarce, but lianes are abundant. In the slightly higher or wet-
ter areas of the Darien. tropical wet forest occurs, extending into
the Choco of neighbouring Colombia. Anacardiiiin excelswn is
dominant in this forest type, with B. quinata. B. sessilis.
Brosiimiin qiiianense. Ceiba pentandra. Cochlospermiim
williamsii. Myroxylon balsainiiin and Oleiocorpon panainense
occurring commonly in the canopy.

Cativo forests, which are pure or very nearly pure stands of
Prioria copaifcra trees, occur on well-drained alluvial flats that
are occasionally inundated with fresh water and have a canopy
of 20-25 in in height. They are mostly found along rivers and
occur, for instance, in broad stands along the Chucunaque, Tuira
and Balsas rivers in the Darien lowlands. Other prominent
canopy trees include Pterocarpiis officinalis. Swartzia pana-
niensis and Tabebiiia pentaphylla.

Orey Canipnospcrnia panamensis forests occur on badly
drained lands on the Western Atlantic coast. They are found in
pure stands in flooded areas such as around Laguna de Chiriqui,
where they are high and dense with a single canopy. In areas
with better drainage they are mixed with other species, some-
times with mangroves, and palm species may be common in the
understorey.

The montane forests in Panama are generally lower and less
dense than the cativo or cuipo forests and they are not clearly
stratified. The canopy is dominated by berba Brosinuiin sp.,
guayabillo Terminalia liicida, olivo Sapiiim sp., cuajado Vitex

212

Panama

cooperi and cedro macho Carapci giiianensis. Anaciirdiiim
excelsiim is rare. Palms are common in the lower vegetation
layer and there is a thick undergrowth.

Quercus forests occur in hilly areas, particularly in the
Western Cordillera. Very large specimens of Q. costaricensis
are present in the montane forests on Volcan Barii (Hartshorn,
1981), while Q. humholdtiana ia a major tree in the oak forests
of Cerro Tacarcuna.

Mangroves

Mangroves are found mainly on the Pacific coast of Panama.
FAO/UNEP (1981) estimated that they covered 4860 sq. km in
the early 1980s, but the estimate in Direccion Nacional de
Recursos Naturales Renovables (1982) is considerably less at
1760 sq. km (Table 23.2); D'Croz (1993) estimates 1710 sq.
km. Map 23.1 shows a coverage of 1819 sq. km for an undeter-
mined date between 1970 and 1980. The red mangroves
Rhizophoia brevistyki and R. mangle are overwhelming domi-
nants of the mangrove forests, generally forming pure stands
with an average height of 25 m. The black mangrove Avicennia
germinans and Pelliciera rhizophorae are only occasional asso-
ciates (Harsthorn. 1981).

The area of mangroves has been systematically reduced by
reclamation of the land for agriculture and cattle pastures and
the establishment of shrimp farms. The mangroves have also
been degraded by collection of wood for fuel and construction
poles and the use of their bark for tannins (INRENARE, 1990).

Forest Resources and Management

In a 1982 publication, the Direccion Nacional de Recursos
Naturales Renovables reported that 35,497 sq. km of forest
remained in 1980 and this is broken down into forest types as
shown in Table 23. 1 . This agrees with the figure in the report by
INRENARE (1990) given in Table 23.2. By 1987, a further
three per cent of Panama had been deforested leaving 33,053 sq.
km of forest in the country. This is a reduction of over 10,000
sq. km from 1970 (Table 23.2). FAO (1993) reports 31,170 sq.
km remaining in 1990 — all of this is considered to be closed
broadleaved forest.

The source map used for Map 23.1 is very generalised and
based on a mixture of data some of which are now 25 years old
(see Map Legend). As a result, no figure for forest cover has
been quoted at the head of the chapter or given in the usual table
as it is considered that it would be too misleading. The forest
area shown on this Map is 35,486 sq. km of lowland forest. 1723
sq. km of submontane forest, 235 sq. km of montane forest and
1819 sq. km of mangrove, giving a total of 39,263 sq. km for
some undetermined date between the years of 1970 and 1980.

Table 23.1 Area of the main forest types in Panama in 1980

Forest Types

Orey forests

Orey and other species

Cativo forests

Cativo and other species

Mixed forests

Mangroves

Protection forests

Total 35,497 100

Source: Direccidn Nacional de Recursos Naturales Renovables ( I982j in INRENARE ( 1990)

Table 23.2 Forest Area in Panama 1970-1987

rea fsq. km)

percei.

450

1.3

170

0.5

300

0.8

194

0.5

17,880

50.4

1,760

5.0

14,743

41.5

1970

1980

J 987

Province

Area

%■*

Area

Bocas del Tora

8.569

8.369

7.975

Code

1,755

1.263

1.090

Colon/San Bias

4.352

3.355

4.385

Darien

15.893

12.652

1 1 .397

Chiriqui

1,553

1.101

1.103

Herrera

182

126

372

Los .Santos

407

347

Panama

7.401

5.813

3.904

Veragiias

3.333

2.465

2.766

Total+

43.445

35.491

33.076

* Per cent of the province covered in forest

+ The country area, rather than land area, of Panama appears to have been used in calculating
per cent cover in the total row. These totals have been recalculated, slightly different
figures are in the source material.

iVra;re.- INRENARE ( 1990)

The cativo forests are the only ones that are currently being
commercially exploited (INRENARE. 1990). They have been
reduced from 700 sq. km to 300 sq. km in the past 19 years and
are in danger of disappearing altogether (INRENARE, 1990).
The orey forests are not being managed at present (INRENARE,
1990). They probably have the highest stocking of timber in the
tropics with average volumes of 383 cu. m/ha for boles greater
than 40 cm in diameter and 716 cu. m/ha for all boles larger
than 10 cm in diameter (Falla. 1978).

The forest industry consisted of 50 mills, 6(J0 furniture shops
and three plywood factories in 1990 (INRENARE. 1990). At
that time the mills were working at only 50 per cent of their
capacity. There is little growth in the industry.

An area of over 20.000 sq. km is potentially available for
reforestation, but only 100 sq. km have been planted in the past
twenty years (INRENARE, 1990).

In 1972, Heckadon estimated that 17 per cent of Panama was
occupied or regularly used by indigenous people. Wildlife, as
both a source of protein and income, plays an important part in
the life of these people. Hunting is particularly important to the
Choco Indians and the Cuna Indians of the interior. Some of the
most frequently hunted species are agouti Dasyprocia punctata,
collared peccary Tayassu tajacu. the Central American tapir
Tapirus bairdii. crested guan Penelope purpurascens and
iguana Iguana iguana. The use of firearms instead of conven-
tional weapons means that there is now excessive killing of
many species.

Deforestation

Hartshorn (1981) has found no evidence of extensive natural
savannas in Panama and he assumes that practically all of the
country was forested at least until the 17th century. However,
the first estimate of forest cover in Panama was not made until
1947 (Garver, 1947). At that time, 70 per cent of the country,
excluding the Canal Zone, was forested. The provinces of
Code. Los Santos and Herrera had already lost a considerable
extent of their forest. 70 per cent in the case of the first two
provinces and 85 per cent in the last. Darien. Bocas del Toro,
Colon/San Bias, and Panama all had 90 per cent or more forest
cover at that time.

213

Panama

214

Panama

215

Panama

Table 23.3 Estimates of forest cover in Panama between 1947 and
1987

Year

Area (sq. km)

1947

52.540

1950

52,445

1960

45,000

1970

40,816

1974

39,000

1980

35,497

1987

33,053

1990

31,170

Per cent

70
68
58
53
50
46
43
40

Source

I
2
2
2
2
3
3
4

Sources: I Carver 1 1 W? land 2 Falla (1978 1 bolh reported in Hartshorn (1981 ); 3 INRENARE
1 19901 (as in Table 23. 1 abovel: 4 FAO ( 19931

al. (1992). Four of these species are forest inhabitants and are
shared only with either Costa Rica or Colombia, while the fifth
is the endemic glow-throated hummingbird Selasphorus ardens
and little is known of its ecology. Panama is an important stag-
ing post for migrating birds with 1 84 species of them reported
in the country (Ridgely and Gwynne. 1989). Three of the four
major bird migration routes between the two Americas converge
in the country.

None of the amphibians is known to be threatened. The rep-
tiles listed by lUCN (Groombridge, 1993) are the narrow-
bridged mud turtle Kinosternon arigustipons. the American
crocodile Crocodylus acutus and five marine turtles.

Little is known about the invertebrates in Panama. The
threatened dragonfly Thauinatoneura inopinata and butterfly
DcdUi octomaculata occur in the country, and otherwise only in
Costa Rica.

Table 23.3 shows the estimated forest cover between the
years of 1947 and 1990 from a number of sources. This table
indicates a total deforestation between these years of 21.370 sq.
km, a mean rate of 486 sq. km each year. Annual deforestation
was estimated at 700 sq. km by the National Institute of
Renewable Natural Resources (INRENARE. 1990). while FAO
(1993) estimated the slightly lower figure of 644 sq. km
between the years of 1981 and 1990. The latter figure gives a
rate of 2. 1 per cent per year.

In Panama, government assisted colonisation, and sponta-
neous colonisation facilitated by extensive road construction, is
a major force putting pressure on the forests of the highlands of
Panama, especially along the Caribbean slope and in the Darien
province. Much of the migration is of peasants from heavily
populated and overexploited areas of Los Santos. Herrera and
Chiriqui (Leonard, 1987). Agriculture is advancing rapidly into
lands unsuitable for traditional farming, and there is consider-
able clearing for cattle pasture.

Biodiversity

Panama has a high biological diversity for its size. Its 218 mam-
mal species, 929 birds (Ridgely and Gwynne. 1989), 226 rep-
tiles and 164 amphibians constitute more vertebrate species than
are found in any of the other Central American countries
(WCMC, 1992). '

The total number of vascular plants in Panama is estimated to
be around 9000 (D'Arcy, 1980; Gentry 1982), with 1226
endemics already recorded (Davis et at.. 1986). Areas high in
endemics are Santa Rita Ridge. El Valle de Anton and Cerros
Azul, Pirre. Campana. Jefe and Pilon (Davis et al, 1986). The
largest and most species rich forest is in Darien Province.

Panama is one of the best known countries of the Neotropics
with regard to the animals within it. For instance, the birds have
been systematically studied for over a century (Ridgely. 1976;
see also Karr. 1985). Detailed behavioural and ecological stud-
ies have been greatly enhanced by the establishment of the
Barro Colorado Research station in 1923.

Three primates, the brown-headed and Geoffroy's spider
monkeys Ateles fusciceps and A. geoffroyi and the Central
American squirrel monkey Saimiri oerstedi are listed by lUCN
as threatened in Panama (Groombridge, 1993). Other threatened
forest mammals are the Central American tapir Tapirus bairdii.
the margay Leopardus wiedu. the bush dog Speotho.^ venuticiis,
the spectacled bear Tretnarcto.s oriiatus and the olingo
Bassaricyon spp.

There are five bird species listed as threatened by Collar et

Conservation Areas

The development of parks in Panama began in 1966 with the
establishment of Altos de Campana National Park; the
Department of Wildlife and National Parks was created two
years later, primarily to administer this park (lUCN, 1992). It
was not until 1975 that a second park was gazetted. There are
now 18 conservation areas within lUCN's categories 1-lV
(Table 23.4).

There are also five forest reserves covering 2127 sq. km, two
large protection forests totalling 4550 sq. km. a water produc-

Table 23.4 Conservation Areas in Panama

Existing conservation areas in lUCN's categories 1-lV are listed
below. For information on World Heritage Sites. Ramsar Sites and
Biosphere Reserves see Chapter 8.

National Parks

Altos de Campana

Camino de Cruces*

Cerro Hoya*

326

Chagres*

1.290

Coiba (includes a marine section)*

2.701

Darien*

5.790

Oral. Division Omar Torrijos H. (El Cope)*

La Amistad*

2.070

Isia Bastimentos (includes a marine section)*

132

Portobelo*

348

SarigLia*

Soberania*

221

Volcan Baru*

140

Wildlife Refuges

Cienega del Mangle*

Isia Iguana

Islas Taboga y Uraba

Penon de la Onda

Natural Monument

Barro Colorado*

Total

13,272

" Area with forest within its boundaries according to Map 23.1.
Sonne.- WCMC lunpubhshed data)

216

Panama

View towards Bocas del Toro from the interior o) La Ainistad National Park.

(Jim Thorsell)

tion reserve of 150 sq. km and two indigenous reserves covering
7526 sq. km; one of these, Comarca Kuna Yala. was set up as
long ago as 1938.

In 1986. the private, nonprofit-making organisation. ANCON
(Asociacion Nacional para la Conservacion de la Naturaleza).
founded in 1985, and INRENARE signed a ten year cooperative
agreement that includes plans for protecting top priority natural
lands. Their first joint project was in Soberani'a National Park.
They have begun marking the boundary of this park and there
are plans to halt deforestation, farming and illegal hunting with-
in it (Navarro and Fletcher. 1988). Other national parks
ANCON is involved with include Chagres. Darien. La Amistad,
Coiba and Isia Bastimentos.

Initiatives for Conservation

There are some 50 agencies in Panama actively concerned
with conservation. They are involved in environmental educa-

tion, protection of conservation areas, reforestation, scientific
investigation and technological development amongst other
things.

The Smithsonian Institution has developed several projects in
the country, probably best known is their considerable scientific
investigation on the island of Barro Colorado.

As well as being involved with the development of conser-
vation areas. ANCON promotes programmes of environmental
education, sustainable development, conservation and scien-
tific research. ANCON has, for instance, collaborated with
USAID to reforest 64 hectares in the Finca Rio Cabuya in the
basin of the Panama Canal; this project was the catalyst for
similar projects in Finca Peresenico in Darien, Finca La
Pintada in Code and Bocas del Tora, Programmes in these
areas include planting native tree species, the establishment of
an agroforestry system and the breeding of Agouti paca and
Iguana iguana for food.

References

Collar, N.J.. Gonzaga. L.P.. Krabbe. N,, Madroiio Nieto, A.,

Naranjo, L.G., Parker III, T.A. and Wege, D.C. (1992).

Threatened Birds of the Americas. The ICBP/IUCN Red Data

Book. ICBP, Cambridge, U.K.
D'Arcy, W.G. (1980). The flora of Panama: historical outline

and selected bibliography. .Annals Missouri Botanical

Garden 67(4); v-viii.
Davis, S.D., Droop, S.J.M., Gregerson, P., Henson, L., Leon,

C.J., Villa-Lobos, J.L, Synge, H. and Zantovska, J. (1986).

Plants in Danger. What do we know? lUCN, Gland,

Switzerland and Cambridge, U.K.

D'Croz. L. (1993). Status and uses of manroves in the Republic
of Panama. In; Conservation and Sustainable Utilization of
Mangrove Forests in Latin America and Africa Regions. Part
1: Latin America. ITTO/ISME Project PD114/q0(F). Pp.
115-137.

Falla, A. (1978). Plan de Desarrollo Forestal: estudio actual
del subsector. FAO/PCT/6/01/I. Panama, Informe tecnico
No. l.Pp. 107.

FAO (1993). Forest resource assessment 1990: tropical coun-
tries. FAO Forestry Paper 1 12. FAO. Rome. Italy.

FAO/UNEP (1981). Pro\ecto de Evaluacion de los Recursos

217

Panama

Forestales Tropicales: Los Reciirsos Forestales de hi

America Tropical. FAO, Rome, Italy.
Garver, R.D. (1947). National Sur\ey of the Forest Resources

of the Republic of Pancimu. State Department, Wa.shington.

28 pp.
Gentry, A.H. ( 1982). Phytogeographic patterns as evidence for a

Choco refuge. In: Biological Diversification in the Tropics.

Prance, G.T. (ed). Pp. 1 12-136. Columbia University Press,

New York.
Groombridge, B. (Ed) (1993). 1994 lUCN Red List of

Threatened Animals. lUCN, Gland, Switzerland and

Cambridge. U.K. 286 pp.
Hartshorn, G.S. (1981). Forests and Forestry in Panama.

Institute of Current World Affairs. 16 pp.
INRENARE (1990). Plan de Accion Forestal de Panama.

Documento Principal. Instituto Nacional de Recursos

Naturales Renovables.
lUCN (1992). Protected Areas of the World: A review of

national systems. Volume 4: Nearctic and Neotropical.

lUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, U.K.
Karr, J.R. (1985). Birds of Panama: biogeography and ecologi-
cal dynamics. In: The Botany and Natural History of

Panama: La Botdnica e Historia Natural de Panama.

D" Arcy, W.G. and Correa, M.D. (Eds). Pp. 77-93.
Leonard, H.J. (1987). Natural Resources and Economic

Development in Central America: A Regional Environmental

Profile. International Institute for Environment and

Development. Transaction books, Oxford, U.K.
Navarro, J.C. and Fletcher, R. (1988). Preserving Panama's

parks. The Nature Conserx'ancy Magazine January/February:

20-24.
Ridgely, R.S. (1976). A Guide to the Birds of Panama.

Princeton University Press.

Ridgely, R.S. and Gwynne, J. (1989). A Guide to the Birds of
Panama with Costa Rica, Nicaragua and Honduras.
Princeton University Press, U.S.A. Pp. 543.

WCMC (1992). Global Biodiversity: the Status of the Earth's
Living Resources. Chapman and Hall, London, xx-i-594 pp.

Author: Caroline Harcourt with contributions from Graciela
Palacios, ANCON, Panama and Julio Ruiz Murrieta, lUCN,
Switzerland.

Map 23.1 Panama

Foresl cover data were obtained from the Atltn Ntuitnuti de Panama: S.l Ve^elacion Aclttal
{ 1 980) at a 1:1 .000.000 scale. These data are very generahsed and based on three main sources;
FAO ( 1 970/7 1 ) Invenlario Forestal Nacional: Alla.K Nacional de Panama ( 1 975 ) and Direccion
de Desarrollo Forestal. Instituto de Recursos Naturales Renovables (INRENARE), Neither
more recent nor more accurate information was able to be found for this project.

The folldtfing categories have been combined to produce an estimation of the moist foresl
cover of Panama: Basques perenntjolios tropicales. Basques perennifolios subtropicales.
Basques perennifolios de tierras alias. Basques stihperennifolios tropicales. To present foresl
'type' information. Holdridge's Life Zones have been overlaid onto this foresl cover. The fol-
lowing Life Zones were combined to generate the forest types shown on Map 23.1. Bosque
Inimedo tropical. Bosque may Inimedo tropical. Bosque luimedo premontano. Basques muy
Iniinedo premontano, and Bosque pluvial premontano — lowland rain forest: Bosque htimedo
nianlaiio haja. Basque muy htimedo montano bajo and Bosque pluvial tnontano bajo — sub-
montane rain forests: Bosque muy luimedo montano and Bosque pluvial montano — montane
rain forests. Mangrove data shown in the Atlas Nacional de Panama appear to be incomplete.
Larger scale ( 1 : 250,000) information has therefore been added from a dyeline map. Repiiblica
de Panama — Inventario de Man^lares, produced in five sheets by the Instituto Geografico
Nacional "Tommy Guardia" (1988).

Data for the protected areas of Panama have been digitised from a dyeline map which accom-
panies a report La Cabenuru Bascosa de Panama (1990). Instituto Nacional de Recursos
Naturales Renovables (INRENARE), The map. showing 'Reservas Forestales' and 'Areas
Sihestres Prolegidas', has been preparea by the Oftcina de Cartografia del Instituto Nacional
de Recursos at a .scale of 1 : 1 million.

218

24 Bolivia

Bolivia's forests rank twelfth in the world in terms of area. They contain important reserves of valuable wood, but logging
is very selective and timber contributes little to the country's economy. Exports of unprocessed timber are banned. As in
most Latin American countries, expansion of agriculture and colonisation are the main causes of deforestation in Bolivia.

The system of protected areas is far from adequate, but there are proposals to remedy this. Conservation of the coun-
try's biodiversity is becoming an increasingly important concern to Bolivians.

Introduction

Bolivia is a landlocked state situated in the central western part
of South America. A wide range of geographical, physiographi-
cal and climatic factors, linked to its intertropical position and
the presence of the Andes, gives rise to a great variety of land-
scapes. These range from tropical lowland forests to high, per-
manently snow-covered mountains and from semiarid. deserts
to forests with an annual rainfall up to 6000 mm.

The country forms part of two of the largest South American
basins, those of the Parana and Amazon, and includes an exten-
sive area of the High Andean Plateau, the Altiplano. The
Amazon Basin covers two thirds of Bolivia (724,000 sq. km);
the Parana Basin, covers 229,500 sq. km or 21 per cent of the
country; and the Altiplano accounts for the remaining 145,080
sq. km (Monies de Oca, 1989). The Altiplano Intercordillera is a
broad expanse of interior basins and valleys with a mean eleva-
tion of 3800 m. It is bordered on one side by the Western
Cordillera and on the other by the Eastern Cordillera and Sub-
Andean ranges. Approximately one third of the country is
mountainous; the highest peak, Volcan Sajama at 6520 m, is in
the Western Cordillera on the border with Chile. The other two
thirds of Bolivia are relatively level or with low relief, mostly
less than 500 m in elevation and sloping gently from south to
north. A few isolated mountains occur in the eastern portion of
Santa Cruz Department.

The latitudinal variations produce wide north-south climato-
logical differences. There is a typical tropical region in the north-
ernmost part of the country, a subtropical-temperate region in the
south and a wide transitional zone between them. In the subtropi-
cal-temperate region, summers are very hot and winters are rela-
tively cold (Ribera, 1992). The low-lying areas of the Amazon
Basin are warm and damp throughout the year, with heavy rain-
fall from November to March. The altiplano is generally dry
between May and November and the nights are coldest in June
and July. Annual rainfall in the driest areas is less than 100 mm,
while the wettest areas receive up to 6000 mm (Solomon, 1989).

According to the preliminary results of the 1992 Population
and Housing Census. Bolivia has a population of 6,300.000.
giving a population density of 5.7 inhabitants per sq. km, one of
the lowest in Latin America (INE, 1992). The higher figure for
Bolivia's population given at the head of this chapter is an esti-
mate from the Population Reference Bureau (1994), but even
this gives a population density of only 7.6 people per sq. km.

The growth rate of Bolivia's population is 2.7 per cent per
year, with annual urban population growth averaging 4.1 per
cent and rural populations decreasing at a rate of -0.01 per cent
each year. The increasing rural to urban migration is a result of
economic problems, which are particularly affecting the
Altiplano and Andean valleys (INE, 1992). Donoso (1992) indi-
cates that around 42 per cent of the population live in rural
areas, while PRB ( 1994) gives the higher figure of 58 per cent.
The urban population is concentrated in three cities: La Paz,
Santa Cruz and Cochabamba.

Bolivia is a multiethnic and pluricultural country. The native
Andean inhabitants are the Quechuas (1.5 million) and the
Aymaras (1 million); these two groups have been most exposed
to Hispanic and Creole cultures. There are, in addition, other,
less numerous indigenous peoples such as the Urus. Chipayas,
Jruhitos and Muratos (Marconi and Donoso, 1992; Martinez and
Carvajac, 1985).

Indigenous forest peoples live in eastern Bolivia. There are
between 130,000 and 200,000 of them, grouped into 38 ethnic
groups belonging to 10 linguistic families. The most numerous
are the Ava Izocefios (38,500) and the Chiquitanos (28.300).
The Tacanas, Guarayos. Ignacianos, Trinitario Arawaks,
Itonamas and Chimanes, each consist of 5000 to 8000 individu-
als. Many of these people are nomadic or semi-nomadic and
depend on harvesting, hunting, fishing and itinerant agriculture
for their livelihood (Arango, 1989).

Bolivia's main exports are minerals and hydrocarbons, the
latter have been important since the 1970s. In 1991. these two

219

Bolivia

accounted for 69 per cent of total exports and earned US$652
million for the country. Coffee and sugar are the main agricul-
tural exports.

The Forests

Bolivia's forests are characterised by a great structural complex-
ity and an enormous diversity of flora, much of which has not
yet been scientifically described. However, Tim Kelleen and
collaborators at the Herbario National are working on a book
about the genera of trees in Bolivia and this should provide
much valuable information. The forests cover mountain areas,
known as "Yungas" and sub-andean regions, as well as vast
lowland regions.

Brockmann's (1978) Mapa de Cobertura y Uso de la Tierra
(Map of Forest Cover and Land Use), prepared on the basis of
LANDSAT imagery, is the most accurate cartographic represen-
tation of Bolivia's forest cover. Brockmann classified the
forests according to their distribution across highlands (over
3000 m), lands of intermediate heights (between 500 and
3000 m) and lowlands (below 500 m). He distinguished
between evergreen and semi-evergreen dense moist forests. The
description below of the forests in the country is based on the
work of Ribera (1992) who combines and integrates the maps
and classification systems developed by different authors,
including Brockmann.

Evergreen Forests

a. Highland forests

Situated in the Yungas region, these forests make up the
upper layer of the very moist cloud forest and Yungas mon-
tane semi-moist forest. The trees, of medium height and with
twisted branches, are covered with epiphytes. There are
many species with small, leathery leaves (Ericaceae and
Myrtaceae) as well species from the Lauraceae family. Trees
of Bninellia. Chisia and Weinmannia occur.

b. Forests at intermediate elevations

These forests, rich in species, are in a very advanced state of
degradation. They include the intermediate and lower layers
of the Yungas forests: cloud forest, semi-moist Yungas forest
and moist Yungas forest. The trees do not exceed 20 metres
in height. The undergrowth is dominated by Gramineae in
the genus Chusqiiea. At lower elevations, these forests
resemble lowland formations, but have a greater number of
palm trees, treelike ferns (Alsophila sp.) and Moraceae in the
genus Ceciopia.

The sub-andean rain forest is a dense multi-strata forma-
tion. It is taller than the Yungas forests and is more diverse.
Palms and species with buttressed roots are common.
Dominant species include Ceiba pentandra. Clarisia race-
mosa, Dipteryx alala, Gallesia integrifolia. Hiira crepitans.
Sloanea fragrans, Spondias inombin and Iriartea deltoidea.

c. Lowland forests

These are dense, multi-layered forests containing a great
variety of species: buttress roots are a typical structural char-
acteristic. The canopy is around 30 m high with emergent
trees of more than 40 m in height. Palm trees are often found
in the intermediate layer.

In the Amazonian moist forest there are two tree species of
great regional economic importance: the rubber tree Hevea
brasiliensis and the Brazil nut Bertholletia exceha. The flora
of the Beni plain moist forest includes a large number of

species that are widely distributed in the Amazon, as well as
others of importance from the Chaco-cerrado region. Those
formations which are subject to extended periods of flooding
have relatively low biological diversity, tending to have
fewer plants and little variet